}i<;;;;J<;<^<;;;;;j;>;<l<j<;;j;{;;i!;;<;5;<j<j 


BR  305  .R44  1904 
The  Reformation 


^< 


THE 

CAMBRIDGE 
MODERN    HISTORY 


•■n^y^o 


THE 


CAMBRIDGE 
MODERN    HISTORY 


PLANNED    BY 

THE   LATE    LORD   ACTON    LL.D. 

REGIUS   PROFESSOR   OF   MODERN    HISTORY 


EDITED    BY 

A.   W.   WARD    LiTT.D. 

G.    W.    PROTHERO    Litt.D. 

STANLEY   LEATHES   MA. 


VOLUME    II 

THE    REFORMATION 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

LONDON:   MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Ltd. 
1904 

All  rights  reserved 


COPTKIGHT,   1904, 

By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


Set  up,  electrotyped,  and  published  January,  1904. 


NorbJooti  Ptcaa 

J.  S.  Cusliing  &  Co.  —  I5erwiek  it.  Smith  Co. 

Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

TN  accordance  witli  the  scheme  of  the  Cambridge  Modern  History,  this 
volume  takes  as  its  main  subject  a  great  movement,  the  Reformation, 
and  follows  this  theme  to  a  fitting  close  in  its  several  divisions.  No 
attempt  is  made  to  fix  a  single  chronological  limit  for  the  whole  range 
of  European  history.  In  international  politics  the  battle  of  Marignano 
made  an  appropriate  close  to  our  first  volume ;  the  Treaty  of  Cateau- 
Cambresis  forms  a  still  more  conspicuous  landmark  for  the  conclusion  of 
our  second.  The  religious  history  of  the  Reformation  period  opens  with 
the  abortive  Fifth  Lateran  Council,  and  Luther's  Theses  follow  close. 
Some  sort  of  religious  settlement  was  reached  in  Germany  by  the  Treaty 
of  Augsburg,  in  England  by  the  great  measures  of  Elizabeth,  for  the 
Roman  Church  by  the  close  of  the  Council  of  Trent;  and  the  latter  two 
events  are  nearly  contemporaneous  with  the  death  of  Calvin.  Before  his 
death  Calvin  had  done  his  work,  and  the  Reformed  Church  was  securely 
established.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Religious  Wars  in  France  had  just 
begun.  Further  developments  of  Lutheranism  and  Calvinism  are  left  to 
be  treated  in  subsequent  volumes. 

In  this  period  the  scene  of  principal  interest  shifts  from  Italy  to  Ger- 
many and  Central  Europe.  Geneva,  very  nearly  the  geographical  centre 
of  civilised  Europe  at  the  time,  becomes  also  the  focus  of  its  most  potent 
religious  thought,  supported  by  her  like-minded  neighbours,  Zurich,  Strass- 
burg,  Basel,  and  the  free  imperial  cities  of  southern  Germany.  As  the 
scene  shifts,  the  main  stream  of  European  life  broadens  out  and  embraces 
more  distant  countries,  Scotland,  Scandinavia,  Poland.  The  Turkish 
danger,  though  still  a  grave  preoccupation  to  the  rulers  of  eastern  Europe, 
had  been  checked ;  and  limits  had  been  set  to  the  Ottoman  advance. 

The  main  proportions  preserved  in  this  volume  will  be  found,  it  is 
hoped,  to  correspond  with  the  relative  importance  of  the  several  themes. 
If  English  topics  are  here  treated  on  a  relatively  liberal  scale,  the  Editors 
cannot  forget  that  this  History  in  the  first  instance  addresses  itself  to 
English  readers,  and   they  look   for   pardon   if,  upon  the  canvas  of  this 


vi  Preface 


work,  Henry  VIII,  the  Protector  Somerset,  Northumberland,  Mary,  and 
Elizabeth  occupy  more  space  than  strict  historical  symmetry  would  demand. 

The  Editors  have  suffered  many  losses  and  disappointments.  Chief 
among  these  is  that  of  the  chapter  on  the  Council  of  Trent  which  Lord 
Acton  had  intended  to  write.  Ko  living  historian  could  hope  to  bring- 
to  this  task  the  wealth  of  accumulated  knowledge  that  Lord  Acton  com- 
manded, or  his  special  opportunities  of  insight.  The  lamented  death  of 
Professor  Kraus  has  prevented  the  chapter  on  Medicean  Rome  from  re- 
ceiving his  final  revision ;  and  the  loss  of  his  bibliography  is  particularly 
to  be  regretted.  Lapse  of  time  and  fresh  engagements  have  disturbed 
many  of  the  arrangements  which  Lord  Acton  had  concluded.  Of  the 
nineteen  chapters  comprised  in  this  work,  nine  have,  however,  been  written 
by  the  authors  to  whom  he  assigned  them. 

In  the  original  plan  no  provision  had  been  made  for  the  Heformation 
in  Poland.  This  topic  hardly  seemed  by  its  importance  to  deserve  a 
separate  chapter,  and  there  were  obvious  reasons  against  including  it  in 
any  of  the  others.  On  the  other  hand  it  could  not  be  altogether  neglected. 
A  brief  summary,  compiled  by  one  of  the  Editors,  may  serve  to  fill  the  gap. 

Moved  by  representations  which  have  reached  them  from  many  quarters, 
the  Editors  have  added  to  this  volume,  as  to  Volume  vii,  a  chronological 
table  of  leading  events.     A  similar  table  for  Volume  i  is  now  also  supplied. 

The  thanks  of  the  Editors  are  due  to  all  the  authors,  who  have  spared 
no  labour  to  perfect  their  several  contributions,  under  conditions  of  time 
which  were  in  many  cases  very  burdensome. 

A.  W.  W. 
G.  W.  P. 

S.  L. 
Cambridge, 

November,  1903. 


TABLE    OF    CONTENTS 

CHAPTER   I 

MEDICEAN   ROME 

By  the  late  Professor  F.  X.  Kraus,  of  Munich 

PAGE 

Pontificate  of  Alexander  VI 1 

Early  ideas  of  Church  reform.     The  House  of  the  Medici  and  the  Re- 
naissance        2 

The  Renaissance  in  Italy.     Reaction.     Savonarola 3 

The  Platonists  at  Florence 4 

Adriano  di  Corneto  and  Julius  II 5 

St  Peter's.      Symbolical  work  of  Michelangelo.     Camera  della  Segnatura  6 

Wide  conceptions  of  Julius  II 7 

Attempt  to  harmonise  modern  culture  with  Christianity    ....  8 

The  Fifth  Lateran  Council.     Estimates  of  Julius  II 9 

Giovanni  de'  Medici  elected  as  Pope  Leo  X.     Estimates  of  Leo         .        .  10 

His  character,  his  work,  and  his  age 11 

Suspension  of  the  great  artistic  works  at  Rome 12 

Architecture,  sculpture,  and  painting  under  Leo 13 

Political  action.      Extravagance,  and  frivolity.      Beginnings  of  decadence  14 

Literature  under  Julius  II  and  Leo  X 15 

Merits  of  Leo  X.     The  University  of  Rome 16 

Promising  beginnings.     Questionable  expenditure  of  Leo  X      .        .        .  17 

Defects  of  Leo  as  a  patron.     Effects  on  his  character  of  the  supreme  power  18 

Final  estimate  of  Leo  X.     Election  of  Adrian  VI,  1522      ....  19 

Character  of  Adrian  VI.     His  reception  at  Rome 20 

Failure  of  Adrian  as  a  reformer.      His  death,  1523 21 

Election  of  Clement  VII.     His  previous  history.     His  character        .         .  22 

Giberti  and  Schomberg.     Wavering  policy  of  Clement       ....  23 
League  of  Cognac,  1526.      Sack  of  Rome,  1527.      Effects  upon  literature 

and  art 24 

Relations  of  Clement  and  Charles  V.     Treaty  of  Barcelona  (1529).     Con- 
ferences at  Bologna,  1530,  1532 25 

Marriage  of  Catharine  de'  Medici  to  Henry  of   France.       Henry  VIII. 

The  General  Council.     Death  of  Clement  VII  (1534)           ...  26 
Failure  of  Julius'   ideas.       Decadence  of   Italy  and  corruption  of  the 

Papacy 27 

Decline  of  literature  and  art 28 

Scheme  of  Reform.     Synod  of  Pisa,  1511 29 

The  Fifth  Lateran  Council,  1512.     The  Council  under  Leo        ...  30 

Proceedings,  and  close  of  the  Council  (1517) 31 

Concordat  with  Francis  I,  1516.     Election  of  Paul  III,  1534      ...  32 

Paul  III  and  the  reform  movement  in  the  Church.      Paul  IV,  and  Pius  V  33 

Last  days  of  Michelangelo.     The  fate  of  Italy 34 

vii 


viii  Contents 


CHAPTER  II 

HABSBURG   AND   VALOIS     (I) 

By  Stanley  Leathes,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  Lecturer  of  Trinity  College 

PAGE 

The  hereditary  feud  of  Burgundy  and  Valois 36 

Unstable  equilibrium  in  Southern  Europe.     Resources  of  Charles  V  and 

Francis  I 37 

Characters  of  Charles  V  and  Francis  I 38 

Nature  and  reactions  of  the  struggle.     Peace  of  Noyon,  1516     ...  39 

Candidature  for  election  to  the  Empire 40 

Election  of  Charles  V,  1519.     Significance  of  the  contest  ....  41 

Negotiations  for  alliance  with  Henry  VIII  and  Leo  X         .         .         .         .  42 

Conclusion  of  alliance  with  Henry  VIII.     Informal  outbreak  of  war,  1521  43 

Occupation  of  Milan.  Death  of  Leo  X,  1521.  Election  of  Adrian  VI,  1522  44 
Treaty  of  Windsor.      Second  campaign  in  Lombardy.      Battle    of  the 

Bicocca,  1522 45 

Disaffection  of  the  Duke  of  Bourbon 46 

Flight  of  the  Duke,  1523.     Failure  of  the  invasions  of  France.      Bonnivet 

in  Italy 47 

Siege  of  Milan.  Retreat  of  Bonnivet,  1524.  Policy  of  Clement  VII  .  48 
Invasion  of  France  under  Bourbon.       Siege  of  Marseilles  and  retreat, 

1524.     Francis  crosses  the  Alps 49 

Francis  besieges  Pavia.     Battle  of  Pavia,  1525 50 

Capture  of  Francis.     Treaty  of  Madrid,  1526 61 

Conspiracy  of  Girolamo  Morone,  1525.  League  of  Cognac,  1526  .  .  52 
Ineffective  action  of  the  League  in  the  Milanese.      Ugo  de  Moncada  and 

the  Colonna 53 

Advance  of  the  Duke  of  Bourbon,  1527 54 

The  Sack  of  Rome 55 

Results  of,  and  responsibility  for  the  Sack  of  Rome 56 

Invasion  of  Italy  by  Lautrec.     Clement  VII  comes  to  terms  with  Charles  V  67 

Siege  of  Naples  by  Lautrec,  1628.     Defection  of  Andrea  Doria  .        .  68 

Events  at  Genoa  and  in  the  Milanese.     Peace  of  Cambray,  1529        .         .  59 

Treaty  of  Barcelona.     Charles  in  Italy.     Settlement  of  Italian  affairs       .  60 

Coronation  of  Cbarles  at  Bologna.     Causes  of  his  success  in  Italy     .         .  61 

Special  features  of  the  war,  1521-9 62 

Resources  of  the  Netherlands  and  Spain 63 

Resources  in  Italy.     Revenues  of  Francis  I 64 

Finance  of  Europe 65 


CHAPTER   III 

HABSBURG   AND   VALOIS     (11) 

By  Stanley  Leathes,  M.A. 

Death  of  Margaret  of  Savoy.  Maria  of  Hungary  regent  in  the  Nether- 
lands     m 

Difficulties  of  Charles  V  in  Italy  and  Germany.      Charles  in  Italy,  1532. 

He  leaves  for  Spain,  1533 07 


Contents  ix 


PAGE 

Francis  I  and  Clement  VII  at  Marseilles.  The  pirates  of  Algiers  .  .  08 
Expedition  against  Tunis,  1535.     Death  of  Clement  VII,  1534.     Election 

of  Paul  III 69 

Occupation  of  Savoy  by  the  French,   1536.      Charles  V  in  Sicily  and 

Naples,  1535 70 

Attitude  of  Paul  III.     Invasion  of  Provence  by  Charles  V         .        .        .  71 

Charles  leaves  for  Spain.     Successes  of  the  Turks  in  the  Levant        .         .  72 

Truce  of  Nice  between  Charles  V  and  Francis  I.     Results  of  the  war        .  73 

Operations  against  the  Turks.     Revolt  of  Ghent,  1539       ....  74 

Reduction  of  Ghent.  Affairs  of  Gelders,  and  of  Italy  ....  75 
Expedition  against  Algiers,  1541.      Outbreak  of  war  between  Charles  V 

and  France,  1542 76 

Barbarossa  at  Toulon.      Reduction  of  the  Duke  of  Cleves,  1543.      Battle 

of  Ceresole,  1544 77 

Henry  VIII  and  Charles  V  invade  France.     Peace  of  Cr6py,  1544     .         .  78 

Fresh  stage  in  the  settlement  of  P^urope 79 

League  of  Charles  V  and  Paul  III.     Opening  of  the  Council  of  Trent       .  80 

Battle  of  Miihlberg,  1547.     Conspiracy  of  Genoa 81 

Death  of  Henry  VIII,  and  Francis  I,  1547 82 

Affairs  of  Piacenza.     Murder  of  Pierluigi  Farnese.     League  of  Paul  III 

with  France 83 

Policy  of  Gonzaga  and  Mendoza  in  Italy 84 

Death  of  Paul  III.     Accession  of  Julius  III.     War  of  Parma     ...  85 

Mirandola.  Dragut  and  the  Ottomans.  War  in  Savoy  ....  86 
Treaty  of  Chambord,  1552.      French  invasion  of  Lorraine.      Charles  V 

besieges  Metz 87 

Revolt  and  reconquest  of  Siena,  1552-5 88 

War  in  the  Netherlands.     Truce  of  Vaucelles,  1556.     Close  of  Charles  V's 

career.     Situation  in  Europe 89 

Charles'  abdication.      Accession  of  Pope  Paul  IV.       His  character  and 

action ^^ 

League  with  France.     War  with  Philip  II,  1556 91 

Death  of  Paul  IV,  1559.       France  at  war  with  Philip  II  and  England. 

Battle  of  St  Quentin 92 

Capture  of  Calais.       Battle  of  Gravelines,   1558.       Treaty   of  Cateau- 

Cambrdsis,  1559 93 

Resulting  settlement  of  Europe 94 

France.     The  Church 95 

Revenue.     Justice.     The  army 96 

The  chief  personages.     The  Constable  de  Montmorency    ....  97 

The  Guises.     Catharine  de'  Medici 98 

Spain.     The  Cortes.     The  Church 99 

The  Councils.     Decline  of  Spain.     Industry  and  trade       ....  100 

Internal  economy.     The  Indies 1^1 

Burgundy  and  the  Netherlands.     Regents 192 

Heresy  in  the  Netherlands.     Condition  of  the  provinces    ....  103 


Contents 


CHAPTER   IV 

LUTHER 

By  the  Rev.  T.  M.  Lindsay,  D.D.,  Principal  of  the  Glasgow  College 
of  the  United  Free  Church  of  Scotland 

PAGE 

»    Balance  of  religious  and  political  forces  in  the  Reformation       ...  104 

Popular  religious  life  in  Germany  in  the  fifteenth  century  .         .         .  105 

Religious  revival.     The  mendicant  Orders 106 

Cult  of  the  Virgin  and  St  Anne.      Lay  interference  in  the  sphere  of  the 

Church 107 

Municipal  charity.     Religious  confraternities 108 

Luther's  youth  at  Eislebeu,  Magdeburg,  and  Eisenach       ....  109 

At  the  University  of  Erfurt 110 

Humanism  and  Scholasticism  at  Erfurt Ill 

Luther's  studies  at  Erfurt 112 

He  takes  religious  vows,  l.jO.5.     His  doubts 113 

The  Augustinian  Eremites 114 

Luther's  religious  difficulties.     Staupitz 115 

Luther's  ordination.     Transfer  to  Wittenberg,  1508 116 

University  of  Wittenberg.     Luther  at  Rome 117 

Luther  professor  of  theology  at  Wittenberg 118 

His  teaching  at  Wittenberg 119 

Gradual  change  in  his  position,  1516-17 120 

Tetzel  and  the  Indulgence,  1517 .         .  121 

The  practice  of  Indulgences 122 

Publication  of  Luther's  Theses,  1517.     Theory  of  Indulgences  .        .        .  123 

Origin  of  Indulgences.     Treasury  of  merits 124 

Indulgences  and  the  Sacrament  of  Penance 125 

Attrition  and  Contrition.     Papal  Indulgences 126 

Abuses  connected.     The  Scholastics 127 

Remission  of  guilt.     Luther's  position 128 

The  "common  man."     The  character  of  the  Theses  ....  129 

Six  propositions.     The  vogue  of  the  Theses 130 

Attacks  upon  and  discussion  of  the  Theses 131 

Luther  summoned  to  Rome,  to  Augsburg,  1518 132 

Intervievi'  with  the  Cardinal-Legate 133 

Mission  of  Miltitz  to  Germany.     Interview  with  Luther    .         .        .         .  134 

Papal  Supremacy.     Disputation  with  Eck  at  Leipzig  ....  135 

Luther's  writings 136 

The  Appeal  To  the  Christian  Nobility  of  the  German  Nation    .        .        .  137 

Attack  on  the  Roman  Church.     Luther  excommunicated  ....  138 

The  Diet  of  Worms,  1521.     The  papal  Nuncio,  Aleander  ....  139 

Luther  at  the  Diet 140 

Luther's  condemnation.     The  Wartburg 141 


ContfMts  xi 


CHAPTER  V 

NATIONAL   OPPOSITION   TO    ROME   IN   GERMANY 

By  A.  F.  Pollard,  M.A.,  Professor  of  Constitutional  History 
in  University  College,  London 

PAGE 

Movement  for  reform  of  government  in  Germany 142 

Dynastic  aims  of  Charles  \.     Effects  on  Germany 143 

His  orthodoxy.     Attitude  towards  tlie  Papacy 144 

Use  of  the  imperial  power  in  Habsburg  interests 145 

Ulrich  of  Wurttemberg.     The  Diet  of  Worms,  1521 146 

The  revolt  against  clerical  domination 147 

The  state  of  popular  feeling  in  Germany 148 

Beichsregiment  and  Bekliskammerfjeridil 149 

Partition  of  Habsburg  territories.     Territorial  ambition  of  the  Princes  of 

Germany 150 

Difficulties  of  the  Beichsregiment 151 

Proposal  to  tax  exports  and  imports 152 

Resistance  of  the  cities 153 

The  knights  and  Sickingen 154 

The  Knights'  AVar.     Invasion  of  Trier 155 

Defeat  and  death  of  Sickingen.     Failure  of  the  Beichsregiment         .        .  156 

Victory  of  the  territorial  principle 157 

Failure  of  the  Edict  of  Worms 158 

Reformation  literature  in  Germany 159 

Spread  of  the  Reformed  doctrines 160 

The  religious  Orders  and  Reform 161 

Lack  of  organisation.     Theological  controversy  increases  ....  162 

Liither  and  Augustine 163 

Activity  of  Luther.     His  Bible 164 

Carlstadt  and  Zwilling  at  Wittenberg 165 

The  Anabaptists 166 

Luther  returns  to  Wittenberg.     The  humanists 167 

Breach  of  the  humanists  with  the  Reformers.     Formation  of  an  opposition 

to  the  Reformers 168 

Secular  Princes  won  by  the  Papacy.     Converts  to  the  Reformation  .         .  169 

The  Nlirnberg  Diets  and  the  papal  Nuncios,  1522 170 

Camj)eggio  at  Niirnberg,  1524 171 

Demand" for  a  General  Council.     Catholic  Princes  at  Ratisbon,  1524         .  172 

Lutheran  meetings  at  Speier 173 


CHAPTER  VI 

SOCIAL   REVOLUTION   AND  CATHOLIC   REACTION   IN   GERMANY 

By  A.  E.  Pollard,  M.A. 

^  Supposed  revolutionary  tendency  of  the  Reformation         ....  174 

^  Element  of  truth  in  the  allegation.     Discontent  of  the  peasants         .        .  175 

The  grievances  of  the  peasants.     The  Roman  Law 176 

Beginnings  of  the  Peasants'  Rising,  1524 177 


xii  Contents 


PAGE 

Articles  of  the  peasants.     Spread  of  the  movement 178 

Religious  element  in  the  rising 179 

Evangelical  Brotherhood.     Articles  of  Memmingen 180 

Ulrich  in  Wurttemberg 181 

Risings  in  the  south  and  west 182 

Leaders,  motives,  and  aims  of  the  rebels 183 

Utopian  schemes 184 

Socialistic  and  communistic  movements  in  the  towns          ....  185 

Thomas  Miinzer  and  his  teaching 186 

Massacre  of  Weinsberg,  1525 187 

The  rebels  in  Franconia.     Attack  on  Wiirzburg 188 

Defeats  of  the  rebels.     Philip  of  Hesse  and  Truchsess        ....  189 

Suppression  of  the  rebellion,  1525-6 190 

Results  of  the  Peasants'  Revolt 191 

Its  nature.     Religious  reaction 192 

Attitude  of  Luther  towards  the  revolt 193 

The  Reformation  in  alliance  with  the  Princes 194 

Secularisation  of  Church  propertj^     Opposing  leagues       ....  195 

Philip  of  Hesse.     Recess  of  Speier,  1526 196 

Clement  VII  and  Charles  V.     Battle  of  Mohacs,  1526        ....  197 

John  Zapolya.     Ferdinand,  King  of  Bohemia 198 

Ferdinand,  King  of  Hungary.     Effects  of  these  preoccupations          .         .  199 

The  Princes  and  the  Lutheran  Church 200 

Demand  for  spiritual  liberty.     Luther's  hymns  and  Catechism          .        .  201 

Pack's  forgeries.     Philip  of  Hesse  and  the  Catholics 202 

Charles  and  Clement  VII ;  the  treaty  of  Barcelona,  1529.     The  Diet  of 

Speier,  1529.     Lutherans  and  Zwinglians 203 

Decisions  of  the  Diet.     The  "Protest" 204 

The  original  Protestants .        .  205 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE   CONFLICT  OF  CREEDS   AND  PARTIES  IN  GERMANY 

By  A.  F.  PoLLAKD,  M.A. 

Protestant  union  ;  its  difBculties.     The  Turks  invade  Hungary         .         .  206 

Siege  of  Vienna,  1529.     Conference  of  Marburg 207 

Luther  and  Zwingli 208 

Doctrine  of  the  Eucharist 209 

Protestant  union  impossible.     Charles  V  in  Germany,  1530       .         .         .  210 

Diet  of  Augsburg ;  Confession  of  Augsburg        .         .         ,         .         .         .  1:11 

The  Tetrapolitana.     Position  of  Charles  between  the  parties     .         .         .  212 

Fruitless  negotiations.  Catholic  proposals ;  fresh  protest  .  .  .  213 
Ferdinand,  King  of  the  Romans.     Recess  of  Augsburg,  1531.     Resort  to 

legal  process 214 

The  Protestant  Princes  at  Schmalkalden 215 

Battle  of  Kappel,  1531.     Swiss  war  proposed  by  Ferdinand      .         .         .  216 

Inaction  of  Charles.     League  of  Schmalkalden  formed,  1531      .         .         .  217 

Charles  conciliates  the  Protestants.     Turkish  invasion  repelled          .         .  218 

Charles  leaves  Germany  for  Italy.     His  failure 219 

France  assists  a  scheme  to  restore  Ulrich  in  Wiirttemberg  .  .  .  220 
Its  success.     Peace  of  Cadan,  1534.     The  Protestants  and  the  lieichskam- 

mergericht 221 


Contents  xiii 


Revolutionary  movements 222 

The  Anabaptists  and  other  sects 223 

Severe  measures.     Resistance.     Miinster 224 

Anabaptists  in  the  Netherlands.     Rising  at  Miiuster,  1534          .         .         .  225 

Anabaptist  rule.     Jan  van  Leyden 226 

Anabaptists  suppressed,  1535 227 

Social  ferment  in  North  Germany.  The  Han.se  League  ....  228 
Affairs  in  Scandinavia.     War  in  the  Baltic.     Wullenwever,  Burgomaster 

of  Liibeck,  1.533 229 

Christopher    of    Oldenburg.       The    Grafenfehde.       Successes    of    Duke 

Christian 230 

Fall  of  Wullenwever,  1535 231 

Danger  of  the  Protestants.  Catholic  League  of  Halle  ....  232 
Extension  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League,  1535.      Ferdinand  compromises 

with  the  Trotestants 233 

Wittenberg  Concord,  1530.  Divisions  among  the  Protestants  .  .  .  234 
Truce  of  Nice,  1538.     Fear  of  a  General  Council.     Mission  of  Held,  1536. 

Catholic  League  of  Niirnberg 235 

Dangers  in  Hungary,  1538-9.     Gelders  and  Cleves-Julich          .        .        .  236 

Joachim  II  of  Brandenburg.     Death  of  Duke  George  of  Saxony        .         .  237 

Further  accessions  to  Protestantism.     Conference  at  Frankfort,  1539        .  238 

Charles'  difficulties  with  German  Catholics.     Conferences          .         .         .  239 

Conference  of  Ratisbon,  1541.     Its  failure 240 

Bigamy  of  Philip  of  Hesse.     Philip  makes  terms  with  Charles  V       .        .  241 

Algiers.     Hungary.     Cleves.     War  with  Francis  I 242 

Partition  of  Wurzen.     The  Protestants  overrun  Brunswick.     Conversion 

of  Hermann  of  Cologne 243 

Conquest  of  Gelders,  1543.     Diet  of  Speier,  1544 244 

Peace  of  Cr^py,  1544 245 


CHAPTER  VIII 

RELIGIOUS   WAR  IN  GERMANY 

By  A.  F.  Pollard,  M.A. 

Religious  situation  in  Germany.     Aims  of  Charles  V         .         .        .        .  246 

Dynastic  purposes,  and  opportunism 247 

Reasons  for  a  policy  of  war 248 

Summons  of  a  General  Council  to  Trent 249 

The  Protestants  reject  the  General  Council.     Charles  holds  out  hopes  of 

a  National  Council 250 

Alliance  of  Paul  III  and  Charles  V.     Bavaria  won  to  Charles.     Divisions 

of  the  Protestants 251 

Maurice  of  Saxony,  and  John  Frederick 252 

Philip  of  Hesse.     Diet  of  Ratisbon.     Charles  V's  diplomacy      .         .         .  253 

Weakness  of  the  Protestants.     The  war  represented  as  not  religious         .  254 

Heresy  and  treason.     Position  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League        .         .         •  255 

The  Schmalkaldic  War,  1546 256 

Maurice  and  Ferdinand  invade  Ernestine  Saxony 257 

Break-up  of  the  Protestant  army.     Negotiations  with  the  South  German 

towns 258 

Hermann  of  Cologne  resigns.     Successes  of  John  Frederick      .         .         .  259 

Paul  III  withdraws  his  troops.     Charles  in  Saxony 260 

Battle  of  Muhlberg,  1547.     The  Elector  and  the  Landgrave  prisoners        .  261 


XIV 


Contents 


The  Diet  of  Augsburg.     Proposed  new  League 262 

Administrative  measures  of  Charles.     Tension  between  him  and  the  Pope  263 

The  General  Council.     The  Augsburg  Interim,  lo48 264 

Nature  and  results  of  the  Interim 265 

The  Leipzig  Interim.     Situation  at  Augsburg 266 

Question  of  the  imperial  succession 267 

Charles'  power  in  Germany  undermined.     Foreign  affairs  .         .         .  268 

Maurice  prepares  for  desertion.     War  of  Magdeburg  ....  269 

Negotiations  with  France.     Successes  of  Maurice 270 

Hans  of  Ciistrin.     Treaty  of  Chambord,  1552 271 

Flight  of  Charles  V.     Conference  at  Passau 272 

Treaty  of  Passau.     Siege  of  Metz,  1552 273 

Albrecht  Alcibiades.     League  of  Heidelberg 274 

Battle  of  Sievershausen,  1553.     Death  of  Maurice.     Death  of  John  Fred- 
erick, 1554.     Albrecht  Alcibiades  expelled 275 

Diet  of  Augsburg 276, 

Terms  of  the  Religious  Peace  of  Augsburg 277 

Cujus  regio  ejus  religio.     The  new  despotism 278 

Results  of  the  Reformation  period  in  Germany 279 


CHAPTER   IX 

THE   REFORMATION   IN   FRANCE 

By  A.  A    TiLLEY,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  King's  College 

The  need  for  Reform  in  France 280 

Independence  of  France.     The  Concordat  of  1516 281 

The  Renaissance.     Lef6vre  d'^fctaples  and  Briconnet          ....  282 

The  Meaux  preachers  and  the  Sorbonne 283 

Persecution  of  Reformers,  1525-32.     Berquin  executed      ....  284 

Vacillating  policy  of  Francis  I.  Cop's  address,  1533  ....  285 
The  Placai'ds  at  Paris,  1534.      Persecutions.      Milder  policy.     Proposed 

conference  with  German  Reformers 286 

The  moderate  party  in  France.     The  Christianae  relif/ionis  institution  1536  287 

Vigorous  measures  against  the  Protestants,  1538-44 288 

Peace  of  Cr^py,  1544,     The  Waldenses  of  Provence 289 

Massacre  of  the  Waldenses,  1545.     The  Fourteen  of  Meaux,  1546     .         .  290 

Results  of  persecution.  Spread  of  Reform  ....  .  291 
The  Universities.     The  channels  for  the  spread  of  Reform.     Henry  II, 

1547 292 

La  Ghamhre  Ardente.     Organisation  of  French  Protestantism  .         .         .  293 

Proposed  Inquisition.     Persecutions .         .  294 

Distinguished  converts.     Protestant  Synod,  1559 295 

Death  of  Henry  II,  1559.     Accession  of  Francis  II.     The  Guises      .         .  296 

The  Tumult  of  Amboise,  1560.  Michel  de  I'Hdpital,  Chancellor  .  .  297 
Edict  of  Roraorantin.      Assembly  of  Notables.      Protestant  conspiracy. 

Arrest  of  Cond6 298 

Death  of  Francis  II,  1560.     Accession  of  Charles  IX.      Catharine  de' 

Medici  Regent.     Estates  at  Orleans 299 

Ordinance  of  Orleans.     Disturbances  in  various  towns      ....  300 

Edict  of  July.     Estates  at  Pontoise.     Attacks  on  the  Clergy     ,        .         .  301 

Colloquy  of  Poissy 302 

The  Protestants  in  power.     Conference  at  St  Germain,  1502      .         .        .  303 

The  Edict  of  January.     Religious  war 304 


Contents 


XV 


CHAPTER   X 


THE   HELVETIC   REFORMATION 


By  the  Rev.  J.  P.  Whitney,  M.A.,  King's  College,  Principal 
the  Bishop's  College,  Lennoxville,  Quebec 


of 


Early  history  of  the  Swiss  communities 

The  Swiss  Confederation.     Zurich      .... 

The  youth  of  Zwingli.     Parish  priest  of  Glarus,  1506 

His  humanistic  and  religious  studies   .... 

Pensions  and  mercenary  service  in  Switzerland.     Removal  to  Einsiedeln 

Comparison  of  Luther,  Erasmus,  and  Zwingli 
Zwingli  people's  priest  at  Zurich         .... 
Zwingli's  ideas.     His  influence  and  position  at  Zurich 
Constitution  of  Zurich.     Waldmann  .... 
Zwingli's  marriage.     Samson  and  Indulgences  . 
Zwingli's  relations  with  Luther  and  Erasmus     . 
Mercenary  service.     Zwingli's  defection  from  the  Papacy 
Fasting  in  Lent.     Zwingli's  Archeteles 
The  first  public  Disputation  at  Zurich,  1523 
Social,  educational,  and  religious  reform     . 
Doctrine  and  observances.     The  Anabaptists     . 
Effect  of  the  Reform  movement  on  the  Swiss  Confederation 
Abolition  of  the  Mass  and  the  monasteries 

Supremacy  of  Zwingli  in  Zurich 

The  Swiss  Anabaptists 

Divisions  in  the  Confederation.     The  Common  Lands 
League  of  the  Catholic  Cantons.     Bern       .... 
Political  schemes  of  Zwingli.     Catholic  counter-movement 
Spread  of  the  Reformation.     Disputation  at  Bern 
Reformation  at  Bern,  Basel,  Constance,  Strassburg   . 
The  Christian  Civic  League  and  the  Christian  Union 
The  Diet  of  Speier.     Imminence  of  civil  war 

St  Gallen.     The  Free  Bailiwicks 

The  first  Peace  of  Kappel,  1529 

The  question  of  the  Eucharist.     The  Conference  of  Marburg 

Failure  of  Zwingli's  political  schemes  .... 

Relations  with  Germany.     The  Tetrapolitana    . 

Decline  of  Zwingli's  influence.     War  of  Musso  . 

War  in  Switzerland.     Battle  of  Kappel  and  death  of  Zwingli 

Second  Peace  of  Kappel 

Results  of  Zwingli's  policy.     Wittenberg  Concord.     First  Helvetic 

fession 

Calvin.     The  Consensus  Tigurinus    .... 
Division  of  the  Swiss  Confederation    .... 


.531 


Con 


PAGE 

305 


307 


309 
310 
311 
312 
313 
314 
315 
316 
317 
318 
319 
320 
321 


.325 


330 
331 
332 
333 
334 
335 
336 
337 
338 


339 
340 
341 


XVI 


Contents 


CHAPTER  XI 

CALVIN   AND   THE   REFORMED   CHURCH 

By  tlie  Rev.  A.  M.  Faikbairn,  D.D.,  Principal  of  Mansfield 
College,  Oxford 

PAGE 

Wider  range  of  ideas  in  the  modern  era 342 

Lutlier's  personal  influence  and  liis  limitations 343 

Inadequacy  of  his  system  and  doctrine 344 

Contrast  between  Luther  and  Zwingli 345 

The  Reformation  and  the  Reformed  Church  in  France       ....  346 

Persecution  in  France 347 

Characteristics  of  the  Reformed  Church  in  France 348 

Influence  of  Calvin.     His  youth  and  antecedents 349 

His  family  education.     University  of  Paris 350 

His  friends,  and  his  relations  with  them 351 

Legal  studies.     The  De  Clementia 352 

Moral  attitude  of  the  Commentary 353 

Cop's  address,  1533,  the  work  of  Calvin.     Flight  of  Calvin         ...  354 

Calvin  at  Basel.     Intellectual  conditions  there 355 

Calvin's  Letter  to  Francis  I ^56 

The  Ghristianae  Religionis  Institutio,  1536.     Various  editions          .         .  357 

Calvin  at  Geneva.     Situation  of  the  city 358 

The  Bishop.     The  Vicedom.     The  citizens 359 

Relations  between  the  Church  and  the  city-State 360 

Relations  between  the  Bishop  and  the  House  of  Savoy       ....  361 
Eyyuenots,  Mamelukes.     Revolt  against  the  Bishop.     Alliance  with  Bern 

and  the  Reformation 362 

Calvin's  spiritual  development 363 

His  problem  as  a  Reformer  and  a  legislator 364 

His  relation  to  Augustine 365 

Influence  of  his  theology  on  his  legislation 366 

Calvin's  first  period  of  rule  at  Geneva,  1536-8 367 

His  drastic  measures.     His  expulsion,  1538.     His  return,  1541  .         .         .  368 

The  relation  of  the  Church  to  the  Churches 369 

The  Ordonnances  Ecclesiastiques 370 

The  Reformed  ministry 371 

Position  of  the  ministers.     System  of  Education 372 

Calvinist  ministers  in  France.     Influence  of  Calvin 373 

The  Consistory 374 

The  State  and  heresy 375 

Some  special  services  of  Calvin   .        . 376 


CHAPTER   XII 

THE   CATHOLIC   SOUTH 

By  the  Rev.  W.  E.  Collins,  B.D.,  Selwyn  College,  Professor  of 
Ecclesiastical  History  in  King's  College,  London 

Reform  movements  in  southern  Europe 377 

Lines  of  division.     The  Reformation  in  Italy.     Adrian  of  Utrecht    .         .         378 
The  Oratory  of  Divine  Love.     Paul  III.     Consilium  de  emendanda  ecdesia        379 


Contents  xvii 


PAGE 

Speziale.     German  influence  in  Italy 380 

The  Reform  movement  at  Venice 381 

Girolamo  Galateo  and  Bartolommeo  Fonzio 382 

Giulio  della  Rovere.     Antonio  Brucioli.     Baldo  Lupetino.     Disciples  of 

the  Reform 383 

Processes  for  heresy  in  the  Veneto.     Court  of  Ren^e  at  Ferrara        .        .  384 

Calvin  at  Ferrara.     Correspondence  with  Ren«5e 385 

The  Modeuese  Academy.     Dispersed,  154G 386 

Deaths  for  religion.     Repressive  measures  in  the  Modenese        .         .         .  387 

Naples.     Juan  and  Alfonso  de  Vald^s 388 

Juan  de  Valdes  at  Naples 389 

Followers  of  Valdes 390 

Pietro  MarLire  Vermigli  at  Lucca 391 

His  sub.sequent  history.     Bernardino  Ochino  of  Siena        ....  392 

Italian  lieformers  in  Switzerland  and  Poland .393 

Pietro  Paolo  Vergerio.     Francesco  Spiera 394 

Sympathisei-s  with  Reform 395 

Aonio  Paleario.     Pietro  Carnesecchi 396 

Process  of  Carnesecchi.     The  Catholic  reformers 397 

Sadoleto,  Contarini,  and  Pole 398 

Fate  of  the  Catholic  reformers.     Reform  of  the  Church  in  Spain        .         .  399 

The  Orders.     Revival  of  learning.     Influence  of  Erasmus  ....  400 

Erasmistas  and  anti-Erasmistas  in  Spain 401 

Francisco  de  Enzinas  (Dryander) 402 

Juan  Diaz  ;  his  murder.     Francisco  de  San  Roman 403 

Reform  movements  in  Spain.     Seville 404 

Gil,  Constantino,  and  Vargas 405 

The  Inquisition  and  the  Reformers  at  Seville 406 

Valladolid.     Agustin  Cazalla.     Carlos  de  Seso 407 

Auto-de-fe  at  Valladolid 408 

Bartolome  de  Carranza 409 

Trial  of  Carranza.  1559-76 410 

Miguel  Serveto.     His  death  at  Geneva,  1553 411 

Social  condition  of  Portugal.     Financial  embarrassment    ....  412 

Establishment  of  the  Inquisition,  1531 413 

Negotiations  with  the  Papacy.     Damiao  de  Goes 414 

The  work  of  the  Inquisition  in  Portugal.     Financial  motives     .        .        .  415 


CHAPTER  XIII 

HENRY   VIII 

By  James  Gairdxer,  C.B.,  LL.D. 

Interviews  of  the  King  with  Charles  V  and  Francis  I,  1520        .         .        .  416 

Treaty  with  Charles  V.     Execution  of  Buckingham,  1521  .        .         .  417 

Wolsey  at  Calais  and  Bruges 418 

Charles  V  in  England.     Treaty  of  Windsor,  1522.     Albany  in  Scotland    .  419 

War  with  the  French  and  the  Scots,  1522 420 

Money  for  the  wars.     Suffolk  in  France,  1523 421 

Failure  of  Suffolk.     War  with  Scotland 422 

Negotiations  with  Bourbon,  with  France.     Battle  of  Pavia,  1525       .         .  423 


xviii  Contents 


PAGE 

Arrest  of  de  Praet.     Embassy  from  Flanders 424 

The  Amicable  Grant.     Treaties  of  the  Moor,  1525 425 

Treaty  of  Madrid.     Position  of  England 426 

League  of  Cognac,  1526.     Embassy  of  the  Bishop  of  Tarbes      .        .        .  427 

Treaties  with  France.     Wolsey  in  France.     Sack  of  Rome        .         .         .  428 

Anne  Boleyn.     War  declared  by  France  and  England  against  the  Emperor  429 

The  Divorce.     Campeggio's  mission  to  England 430 

The  Trial  before  the  Legates 431 

Fall  of  Wolsey.     New  Parliament 432 

Thomas  Cranmer.     Mission  to  Bologna 433 

The  Divorce.     Wolsey's  pardon.     His  College.     Arrest  of  Wolsey    .         .  434 

His  death,  1530.     His  character.     Pressure  on  the  Pope    ....  435 

Praemunire.     The  King  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church       ....  436 

Henry  leaves  Catharine  finally.     Annates  abolished 437 

Submission  of  the  Clergy.     Resignation  of  Sir  Thomas  More     .         .         .  438 

Alliance  of  France  and  England.     Marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  1533        .  439 

The  King's  marriage  annulled,  1533.     Excommunication  ....  440 

Sir  Thomas  More  and  Fisher  sent  to  the  Tower 441 

Irish  Rebellion.     Act  of  Supremacy 442 

Fisher  and  More  executed.     Character  of  More 443 

Visitation  and  first  suppression  of  monasteries 444 

Anne  Boleyn  beheaded.     Jane  Seymour.     Act  of  Succession     .         .         .  445 

The  Ten  Articles.     Aske's  rebellion 446 

The  rebellion  suppressed.     Reginald  Pole's  mission 447 

Further  suppression  of  the  monasteries 448 

Executions  of  various  noblemen.     Intrigues  against  Henry        .         ,         .  449 

Act  of  Six  Articles.     Anne  of  Cleves 450 

Anne  of  Cleves  divorced.     Catharine  Howard.     Cromwell  beheaded         .  451 

His  character.     The  King  in  Yorkshire 452 

Catharine  Howard  beheaded.     Scotland 453 

Scotland  during  the  youth  of  James  V 454 

James  V  and  Henry  VIII 455 

Battle  of  the  Solway  Moss.     Death  of  James  V 456 

Treaties  with  Scotland.     War  with  France 457 

Mary  Stewart  crowned.     The  treaties  repudiated 458 

Siege  of  Boulogne.     The  currency 459 

Ancrum  Moor.     Ineffective  war  with  France 460 

Peace  with  France 461 

Murder  of  Beton.     Death  of  Henry  VIII 462 

Absolutism  of  Henry  VIII.     Breach  with  Rome 463 

The  new  conditions  of  religion.     Translation  of  the  Bible  .        .        .  464 

Tyndale.     Coverdale 465 

The  Great  Bible.     Effects  of  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles    ....  466 

Anne  Askew.     Dissolution  of  the  monasteries 467 

Effects  of  the  suppression.     Education 468 

Agrarian  legislation  and  poor  laws 469 

Taxation.     Debasement  of  the  coinage.     Wales 470 

Council  of  the  Marches,  of  the  North.     Ireland 471 

Irish  title.     The  navy 472 

The  army 473 


Contents 


XIX 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE   REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD  VI 

By  A.  F.  Pollard,  M.A. 

PAGE 

Jituation  in  England  at  Edward  VI's  accession 474 

The  King's  will.     The  new  government 475 

Protector  Somerset 476 

Destruction  of  Henry  VIII's  absolutism.     Impulse  to  the  Reformation     .  477 

Spirit  of  the  English  Reformation 478 

Its  character  under  Edward  VI 479 

Proclamations  against  innovations.     Somerset's  policy       ....  480 

The  attitude  of  Cranmer  and  tlie  Church 481 

Practical  reforms  in  religion.     Chantries  Bill 482 

Further  reforms.     Desire  for  uniformity  of  worship 483 

The  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer.     The  aims  of  its  authors    ,         .         .  484 

The  agitation  of  Reformers  and  of  Catholics 485 

Religious  persecution.     Foreign  policy 486 

The  attempted  union  with  Scotland.     Pinkie  Cleugh          ....  487 

Thomas  Seymour,  Lord  High  Admiral 488 

The  agrarian  revolution 489 

Measures  against  enclosure.     The  Protector's  policy          ....  490 

The  Enclosure  Commissions.     Hales.     The  bills  rejected  ....  491 

Peasants'  revolt.     Robert  Ket.     French  aggression 492 

War  with  France,  1549.     Defeat  of  the  peasants 493 

Warwick's  plot  against  the  Protector 494 

The  Fall  of  Somerset,  1549 495 

Reaction  against  his  policy.     Treason  Act 496 

Agrarian  repression.     Hopes  of  the  Catholics 497 

More  stringent  policy  of  Reform 498 

Disgraceful  treaty  with  France,  1550 499 

Religious  controversy.     Popular  violence 600 

Religious  persecution 501 

Bishop  Hooper.     Spoliation  of  Church  property 502 

Progress  of  the  Reformation 503 

Release  of  Somerset.     His  rivalry  with  Warwick 504 

Coup  cVctat  of  Northumberland  (Warwick),  1551 505 

Trial  of  Somerset 506 

His  execution.     Second  Act  of  Uniformity 507 

Second  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  1552.     Articles  of  Religion.     Further 

seizure  of  Church  property 508 

Parliament  of  1553.     Dangerous  position  of  Northumberland    .         .         .  509 

Settlement  of  the  Crown  on  Lady  Jane  Grey  and  Guilford  Dudley    .        .  510 

Death  of  Edward  VI,  1553          . 511 


CHAPTER  XV 

PHILIP   AND   MARY 

By  James  Bass  Mullinger,  M.A.,  University  Lecturer  in  History 
and  Lecturer  of  St  John's  College 


Position  of  affairs  in  England      .... 

Leading  diplomatists  of  the  reign 

Proclamation  of  Lady  Jane  Grey.     Flight  of  Mary 


512 
513 
514 


XX 


Contents 


PAGE 

Northumberland  marches  against  Mary.     Advice  of  Charles  V  .         .  515 

Proclamation  of  Mary 516 

Failure  of  Northumberland.     Success  of  Mary 517 

Clemency  of  Mary.     Cardinal  Pole 518 

His  advice  to  Mary 519 

Position  of  Elizabeth.     Mary's  difficulties 520 

Her  Church  policy.     The  Keformers.     Cranmer 521 

Mary's  First  Parliament.     Moderate  reaction 522 

The  suitors  for  Mary's  hand.     Edward  Courtenay 523 

Acceptance  of  Philip's  offer.     The  Commons 524 

Marriage  Treaty  with  Philip 525 

Conspiracies  against  Mary 526 

Sir  Thomas  Wyatt  in  Kent 527 

Wyatt  in  London.     Executions  of  Jane,  Dudley,  Wyatt,  and  others         .  528 

Elizabeth.     Michiel.     Cardinal  Pole 529 

Mary's  Second  Parliament 530 

The  royal  wedding.     Mary's  counsellors 531 

Arrival  of  Pole.     Return  of  England  to  the  Papal  obedience     .        .        .  532 

The  Reformers.     The  first  martyrs 533 

Election  of  Caraffa  as  Pope,  1555.     His  policy 534 

Elizabeth  at  Hampton  Court.     Mary's  delusion 535 

Departure  of  Philip 536 

Abdication  of  Charles  V.     Measures  against  heresy 537 

The  martyrs.     Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer 538 

Proceedings  at  Oxford.     The  disputation 539 

The  Reformers  petition  Parliament.     Attitude  of  Parliament    .         .        .  540 

The  martyrdoms  at  Oxford.     Cranmer 541 

Grants  of  money.     The  Death  of  Gardiner 542 

Increased  severity  of  Mary.     Attitude  of  Pole 543 

The  Dudley  conspiracy 544 

Relations  of  the  European  Powers  in  1557 545 

Paul  IV  and  Pole.     Rebellion  of  Stafford 546 

Victories  of  Spain  in  Italy  and  France 547 

Scotland.     Mary  Stewart.     Loss  of  Calais 548 

Last  Days  of  Queen  Mary 549 


CHAPTER   XVI 

THE  ANGLICAN   SETTLEMENT  AND  THE  SCOTTISH   REFORMATION 

By  F.  W.  Maitland,  LL.D.,  Downing  Professor  of  the 
Laws  of  England 

Entry  of  Scotland  into  the  history  of  Europe 550 

Scotland  in  the  Middle  Ages 551 

The  Scottish  King,  Parliament,  and  nobles 552 

The  backwardness  of  Scotland.     The  Church 553 

The  Church  and  the  nobles.     Heresy 554 

Distrust  of  England.     Death  of  James  V.     Regency  of  Arran  .         .        .  555 

Murder  of  Beton.     Battle  of  Pinkie,  1547 656 

Mary  Stewart.     War  with  England.     Mary  of  Lorraine     ....  557 

John  Knox  and  the  Congregation  of  Jesus  Christ 558 

Accession  of  Elizabeth 559 

Elizabeth's  title.     Her  religion 560 


Contents  xxi 


PAGE 

Elizabeth  and  her  relations  to  foreign  Powers 561 

Religious  condition  of  England.     Elizabeth's  own  faith     ....  562 

A  return  to  the  position  of  Henry  "VIII  impossible 563 

Elizabeth  and  Paul  IV.     Her  First  Parliament 564 

Her  first  acts.     Relations  with  the  Continent 565 

Cateau-Cambr&is.     Convocation.     The  Commons 566 

Act  of  Suijremacy 567 

Colloquy  of  Westminster 568 

Supreme  Governor  of  the  Church.     The  Act  of  Uniformity       .        .         .  569 

The  religious  Settlement 570 

The  new  Bishops.     Confirmation  and  consecration 571 

"All  defects  supplied."     The  Scottish  rebellion 572 

Elizabeth  and  the  Scottish  Protestants 573 

England,  France,  and  Scotland 574 

Negotiations  between  England  and  the  Scottish  Protestants      .         .        .  575 

Treaty  of  Berwick,  1560 576 

Siege  of  Leith  and  Treaty  of  Edinburgh 577 

Elizabeth,  Philip  II,  and  Pius  IV 578 

The  papal  Nuncio.     The  Scottish  Reformation  Parliament        .        .        .  579 

Success  of  the  Scottish  Reformation 580 

The  Queens  of  England  and  Scotland 581 

Elizabeth  and  Robert  Dudley 582 

The  invitation  to  the  Council  of  Trent 583 

England  and  the  First  French  AVar  of  Religion 584 

Elizabeth's  Second  Parliament.     The  Oath  of  Supremacy          .         .         .  585 

Elizabeth  and  the  Catholics.     Position  of  the  Bishops        ....  586 

The  Articles  of  Religion 587 

Lutherans  and  Calvinists 588 

The  Thirty-nine  Articles.     The  Canon  Law 589 

The  Vestiarian  controversy 590 

The  Churches  of  England  and  Scotland 591 

Beginnings  of  Puritanism 592 

Organisation  of  the  Scottish  Church.     Presbyterianism      ....  593 

"  Parity  "  and  prelacy.     Superintendents 594 

Questions  still  unsettled.     Erastianism 595 

Relations  between  State  and  Church  in  Scotland 596 

Elizabeth  and  the  Calvinists.     Zurich.     BuUiuger 597 

First  years  of  Elizabeth 598 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE   SCANDINAVIAN   NORTH 

By  the  Rev.  W.  E.  Collins,  B.D. 

The  Scandinavian  monarchies 599 

The  Union  of  Kalmar,  1397.     Defects  of  the  compact        ....  600 

Changes  in  the  united  kingdoms.     The  clergy 601 

Abuses  in  the   Church.      I.    Denmark.      Accession  of  Christian  II  in 

Denmark,  1513 602 

Reconquest  of  Sweden  by  Christian 603 

The  Stockholm  Bath  of  Blood,  1520.     Christian's  Danish  policy        .         .  604 

His  exactions  and  administrative  policy 605 

Beginnings  of  ecclesiastical  Reform 606 

New  rules  for  the  clergy.     Christian's  difficulties 607 


xxii  Conteyits 


PAGE 

Flight  of  Christian  II.     Position  of  his  successor,  Frederick  I    .        .         .  608 

Paul  Eliaesen  and  his  followers 609 

Dispute  concerning  the  see  of  Lund 610 

Lutheran  policy  of  Frederick  I  and  his  son  Christian         ....  611 

Frederick  I  and  the  Bishops 612 

Progress  of  the  Reform.     Death  of  Frederick  I 613 

Disputed  election.     The  Count's  War 614 

Christian  III.     His  successes.     Fate  of  the  Bishops 615 

Superintendents.     New  Church  Ordinance 616 

Later  history  of  the  Reformation  in  Denmark.     II.    Norway     .         .         .  617 

Spoliation  of  the  Church  in  Norway 618 

Invasion  of  Christian  II.     Death  of  Frederick  I.     Archbishop  Olaf  and 

Christian  III 619 

Christian  III  in  possession  of  the  throne.  His  measures  ....  620 
Reformation  in  Iceland.      III.    Sweden.     Rising  under  Gustaf  Eriksson 

(Gustavus  Vasa) 621 

Gustavus  King,  1523.     His  difficulties 622 

Demands  of  money  from  the  clergy.     Relations  with  the  Pope          .         .  623 

Reformers  in  Sweden.     Olaus  and  Laurentius  Petri 624 

The  Diet  of  Vesteras,  1527 625 

Gustavus'  ultimatum.     The  Recess  of  Vesteras 626 

Supremacy  and  policy  of  Gustavus 627 

Gradual  and  progressive  changes 628 

The  Ordinaries.     Erik  XlV-Johan  III 629 

Further  ecclesiastical  changes 6.30 

Negotiations  with  the  Papacy.     The  Jesuits 631 

Defeat  of  the  Romanising  party.     King  Sigismund,  1592.     The  Council 

of  Upsala 632 

Swedish  religious  settlement 633 


NOTE   ON   THE   REFORMATION   IN   POLAND 

By  Stanley  Leathes,  M.A. 

The  condition  of  the  Church  in  Poland 634 

Spread  of  Lutheran  and  other  opinions  in  Poland 635 

The  Bohemian  Brethren.      Ecclesiastical  licence.      Divisions  among  the 

Reformers 636 

The  Anti-Trinitarians.     Hosius  and  the  Jesuits.     Lelio  and  Fausto  Sozzini  637 

The  Socinians 638 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

THE   CHURCH   AND    REFORM 

By  R.  V.  Laurence,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  Assistant-Lecturer  of 
Trinity  College 

Different  parties  among  the  Catholic  reformers 639 

The  Oratory  of  Divine  Love 640 

Venice,  Padua,  and  Modena.     Adrian  VI 641 

Clement  VII.     Fear  of  a  General  Council.     Paul  III         ....  642 


Contents  xxiii 


PAGE 

Commission  of  Cardinals,  1537.     Their  recommendations  .         ,         .  643 

Contarini  and  Paul  III 644 

Reforms  of  Paul  III.     Religious  Colloquy  at  Ratisbon,  1541      .         .         .  645 

Failure  of  the  Colloquy.     The  religious  Orders 646 

Reform  of  monastic  Orders.     The  Capuchins 647 

The  Theatine  Order.     The  Barnabites.     Caraffa 648 

Split  of  the  Catholic  reformers.     The  Inquisition 649 

The  Spanish  Inquisition.     The  Inquisition  at  Rome 650 

Ignatius  Loyola.     His  early  history 651 

Foundation  of  the  Society  of  Jesus 652 

Confirmation  by  Pope  Paul  III,  1540 653 

Constitution  of  the  Society.     Election  of  Loyola  as  General      .         .         .  654 

Relations  of  the  Jesuits  to  successive  Popes 655 

Laynez  elected  General,  1558.     Interference  of  Paul  IV     ....  656 

The  Spiritual  Exercises  of  St  Ignatius 657 

Organisation  of  the  Society 658 

Spread  of  its  influence 659 

Failure  of  Contarini  and  his  associates 660 

Summons  of  a  Council  to  Trent.     Adjournment.     Questions  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  Council 661 

Negotiations  between  the  Pope  and  Charles  V 662 

Legates  appointed  for  the  Council.     The  Council  opens,  1545    .        ,         .  663 

Arrangements  for  business.     Spanish  and  Italian  Bishops  .         .         .  664 

Consideration  of  doctrine  and  of  reform.     The  rule  of  Faith      .         .         .  665 

Church  discipline.     Original  Sin.     Justification 666 

Seripando.     The  Jesuits  at  the  Council 667 

Justification.     Fear  of  more  stringent  reform 668 

Decrees  on  Justification.     Residence  of  Bishops 669 

Removal  of  the  Council  to  Bologna,  1549.     Suspension.     Election  of  Pope 

Julius  III 670 

The  second  meeting  of  the  Council  at  Trent,  1551.     The  doctrine  of  the 

Eucharist 671 

Penance  and  Extreme  Unction.     Suspension  of  the  Council,  1552     .        .  672 

Pope  Paul  IV,  1555.     His  secular  and  religious  policy       ....  673 

Pope  Pius  IV,  1559.     Fresh  summons  of  a  Council 674 

Division  among  the  Catholic  Pov^ers 675 

Third  meeting  of  the  Council  at  Trent,  1562 676 

Divisions  in  the  Council.     Residence  of  Bishops 677 

The  question  of  the  continuity  of  the  Council 678 

The  question  of  Communion  in  both  kinds 679 

The  Sacrament  of  Orders.     The  rights  of  Bishops 680 

The  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  and  Ferdinand 681 

The  new  Legates.     Canisius 682 

Dissensions  of  the  French  and  the  Spaniards.     Marriage  ....  G83 

Close  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  1563 684 

Results  of  the  Council 685 

Acceptance  and  execution  of  the  decrees 686 

The  Index  of  Prohibited  Books 687 

The  new  Catholicism 688 

End  of  the  movement  for  Catholic  reform 689 


XXIV 


Contents 


CHAPTER  XIX 

TENDENCIES   OF   EUROPEAN   THOUGHT   IN   THE   AGE   OF 
THE   REFORMATION 

By  the  Rev.  A.  M.  Fairbairx,  D.D. 

PAGE 

The  new  intellectual  movements 690 

Religion  and  philosophy 691 

Renaissance  and  Reformation.     Latin  and  Teuton 692 

Characteristics  of  the  two  systems  of  thought 693 

Influence  of  Lorenzo  Valla  on  the  Reformers 694 

Mysticism.     Pico  della  Mirandola  and  Reuchlin 695 

Occasion  of  the  Epistolae  ohscurorum  virorum 696 

Erasmus  and  his  influence 697 

The  letters  of  Erasmus 698 

His  critical  work  and  religious  attitude 699 

The  spirit  of  the  Latin  Renaissance 700 

Gemistus  Plethon  and  the  Neo-Platonists 701 

The  Platonic  Academy.     The  new  Aristotelians 702 

Pomponazzi  and  his  philosophy 703 

The  new  scholasticism 704 

New  attitude  of  the  defenders  of  the  Church 705 

Bernardino  Telesio 706 

Campanella.     Giordano  Bruno 707 

The  life  and  death  of  Giordano 708 

His  philosophy 709 

The  French  Renaissance 710 

Rabelais  and  Montaigne 711 

The  Teutonic  Renaissance 712 

Characteristics  of  the  movement 713 

Luther.     Jakob  Boehme 714 

The  Anabaptists.     The  will  of  God 715 

Heretical  views  of  the  Deity 710 

The  philosophy  of  Predestination 717 

The  new  scholarship 718 


BIBLIOGRAPHIES 


I,  II,  AND  III.     Medicean    Rome,    and    llabsburg    and 
Valois  ...... 

IV.     Luther 

V— VIII.     Germany,  1521—1555  .... 
IX.     The  Reformation  in  France 
X.     The  Helvetic  Reformation 

XI.     Calvin 

XII.     The  Catholic  South  .... 

XIII.  Henry  VIII 

XIV.  The  Reformation  under  Edward  VI 
XV.     Philip  and  Mary 

XVI.     The    Anglican    Settlement    and    the    Scottisl 
Reformation  ...... 

XVII.     The  Scandinavian  North  .... 

XVIII.     The  Church  and  Reform  .... 

XIX.     Tendencies  of  European  Thought  in  the  Age 
of  the  Reformation        .... 

Chronological  Table  of  Leading  Events 
Index    


719—727 
728—733 
734_764 

765—768 
769—778 
779—783 
784—788 
789—794 
795—801 
802—805 

806—813 
814—817 

818—824 

825—828 
829—834 
835—857 


ERRATA 

p.  4,  1.  3  from  bottom.     For  Pomponazzo  read  Pomponazzi. 

p.  15,  1.  14  from  bottom.     For  Inghiriami  read  Inghirami. 

p.  23,  1.  11  from  top.     For  Gaspare  read  Gasparo. 

p.  48, 1.  18  from  bottom.     For  morale  read  moral. 

p.  72,  1.  3  from  top.     For  Pica  read  Pico. 

p.  160,  1.  12  from  bottom.     For  Rhegius  read  Regius. 

p.  160,  1.  1  from  bottom.     For  von  der  Dare  read  van  der  Dare. 

p.  234,  1.  21  from  top.     For  only  stopped  but  for  a  while  read  only 
stopped  for  a  while. 


THE 

CAMBRIDGE 
MODERN    HISTORY 


CHAPTER  I 

MEDICEAN   EOME 

On  the  18th  of  August,  1503,  after  a  sudden  and  mysterious 
iUness  Alexander  VI  had  departed  this  life  —  to  the  unspeakable  joy 
of  all  Rome,  as  Guicciardini  assures  us.  Crowds  thronged  to  see 
the  dead  body  of  the  man  whose  boundless  ambition,  whose  perfidy, 
cruelty,  and  licentiousness  coupled  with  shameless  greed  had  infected 
and  poisoned  all  the  world.  On  this  side  the  Alps  the  verdict  of 
Luther's  time  and  of  the  centuries  which  followed  has  confirmed  the 
judgment  of  the  Florentine  historian  without  extenuation,  and  so  far  as 
Borgia  himself  was  concerned  doubtless  this  verdict  is  just.  But  to-day  if 
we  consider  Alexander's  pontificate  objectively  we  can  recognise  its  better 
sides.  Let  it  pass  as  personal  ambition  that  he  should  have  been  the  first 
of  all  the  Popes  who  definitely  attempted  to  create  a  modern  State  from 
the  conglomerate  of  the  old  Stati  pontificii,  and  that  he  should  have 
endeavoured,  as  he  undeniably  did,  step  by  step  to  secularise  that  State 
and  to  distribute  among  his  friends  the  remaining  possessions  of  the 
Church.  But  in  two  ways  his  government  shows  undeniable  progress  : 
in  the  midst  of  constant  tumult,  during  which  without  interruption 
tyranny  succeeded  to  tyranny  in  the  petty  States,  when  for  centuries 
neither  life  nor  property  had  been  secure,  Cesare  Borgia  had  established 
in  the  Romagna  an  ordered  government,  just  and  equal  administration 
of  the  laws  ;  provided  suitable  outlets  for  social  forces,  and  brought 
back  peace  and  security  ;  and  by  laying  out  new  streets,  canals,  and  by 
other  public  works  indicated  the  way  to  improve  agriculture  and  increase 
manufacture.  Guicciardini  himself  recognises  all  this  and  adds  the 
important  comment,  that  now  the  people  saw  how  much  better  it  was 
for  tlie  Italians  to  obey  as  a  united  people  one  powerful  master,  than 
to  have  a  petty  despot  in  every  town,  who  must  needs  be  a  burden  on 
the  townsfolk  without  being  able  to  protect  and  help  them.  And  here 
Guicciardini  touches  the  second  point  which  marks  the  pontificate  of 
Alexander  VI,  the  appearance,  still  vague  and  confused,  of  the  idea  of  a 
future  union  of  the  Italian  States,  and  their  independence  of  foreign  rule 
and  interference.     Alexander  played  with  this  great  political  principle 

C.    M.    H.    II.  1  1 


Eaidy  ideas  of  reformation 


though  he  did  not  remain  faithful  to  it ;  to  what  could  he  have  been 
faithful  ?  Was  not  his  very  nature  immoral  and  perfidious  to  its  core  ? 
But  now  and  then  at  least  he  made  as  if  he  would  blazon  on  his  banner 
the  motto  Italia  fard  da  se ;  this  brought  him  a  popularity  which 
nowadays  it  is  hard  to  understand,  and  made  it  possible  for  him,  the 
most  unrighteous  man  in  Italy,  to  gain  the  victory  over  the  most 
righteous  man  of  his  time  and  to  stifle  Savonarola's  reforming  zeal 
among  the  ashes  at  the  stake. 

The  idea  of  a  great  reformation  of  the  Church  in  both  head  and 
members  had  arisen  since  the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and 
was  the  less  likely  to  fade  from  the  mind  of  nations  since  complaints  of 
the  evils  of  Church  government  were  growing  daily  more  serious  and 
well-grounded  and  one  hope  of  improvement  after  another  had  been 
wrecked.  No  means  of  bringing  about  this  reform  was  neglected  ;  all 
had  failed.  Francis  of  Assisi  had  opposed  to  the  growing  materialism 
and  worldliness  of  the  Church  the  idea  of  renunciation  and  poverty. 
But  Gregory  IX  had  contrived  to  win  over  the  Order  founded  by  the 
Saint  to  the  cause  of  the  Papacy,  and  to  set  in  the  background  the 
Founder's  original  purpose.  Thrust  into  obscurity  in  the  inner  sanc- 
tuary of  the  Order,  this  purpose,  tinged  by  a  certain  schismatic  colouring, 
developed  in  the  hands  of  the  Spirituales  into  the  Ecclesia  Spiritualis  as 
opposed  to  the  Ecclesia  Carnalis,  which  stood  for  the  ofiicial  Church. 
Traces  of  this  thought  are  to  be  found  in  Dante  ;  we  may  even  call  it 
the  starting-point,  whence  he  proceeds  to  contrast  his  Monarchia  with 
the  political  Papacy  of  the  fourteenth  century,  and  as  a  pioneer  to 
develop  with  keen  penetration  and  energy  the  modern  idea  of  the  State. 
The  opponents  of  the  Popes  of  Avignon  in  reality  only  fought  against 
their  politics  without  paying  any  attention  to  the  moral  regeneration  of 
Christendom.  Theological  science  in  the  fifteenth  century  raised  the 
standard  of  reform  against  the  dependence  of  the  Papacy,  the  triple 
Schism,  and  the  disruption  of  the  Church.  But  she  too  succumbed,  her 
projects  foiled,  at  the  great  ecclesiastical  conferences  of  Constance  and 
Basel.  Asceticism,  politics,  theology  had  striven  in  vain  ;  the  close  of 
the  Middle  Ages  on  both  sides  of  the  Alps  was  marked  by  outbursts  of 
popular  discontent  and  voices  which  from  the  heart  of  the  nations  cried 
for  reform,  prophesying  the  catastrophe  of  the  sixteenth  century.  None 
of  these  voices  was  mightier  than  Savonarola's,  or  left  a  deeper  echo. 
He  was  the  contemporary  and  opponent  of  the  men  who  were  to  give 
their  name  to  this  epoch  in  Rome's  history. 

The  House  of  the  Medici  passes  for  the  true  and  most  characteristic 
exponent  of  the  Renaissance  movement.  We  cannot  understand  the 
nature  and  historical  position  of  the  Medicean  Papacy  without  an 
attempt  to  explain  the  character  and  development  of  this  movement. 
The  discovery  of  man  since  Dante  and  Giotto,  the  discovery  of  Nature 
by  the   naturalism  of   Florence,  the  revival  of   classical   studies,  and 


The  Eenaissajice  in  Italy 


the  reawakening  of  the  antique  in  Art  and  Literature  are  its  compo- 
nent parts  ;  but  its  essence  can  only  be  grasped  if  we  regard  the  Renais- 
sance as  the  blossoming  and  unfolding  of  the  mind  of  the  Italian  people. 
The  early  Renaissance  was  indeed  the  Vita  Nuova  of  the  nation.  It  is 
an  error  to  believe  that  it  was  in  opposition  to  the  Church.  Art  and 
the  artists  of  the  thirteenth  century  recognised  no  such  opposition.  It 
is  the  Church  v/ho  gives  the  artists  employment  and  sets  them  their 
tasks.  The  circle  of  ideas  in  which  they  move  is  still  entirely  religious: 
the  breach  with  the  religious  allegory  and  symbolism  of  the  Middle 
Ages  did  not  take  place  until  the  sixteenth  century.  In  the  fourteenth 
century  the  spread  of  naturalistic  thought  brought  about  a  new  con- 
ception of  the  beauty  of  the  human  body  ;  this  phase  was  in  opposition 
to  the  monastic  ideal,  yet  it  had  in  it  no  essential  antagonism  to  Chris- 
tianity. It  was  a  necessary  stage  of  the  development  which  was  to  lead 
from  realism  dominant  for  a  time  to  a  union  of  the  idealist  and  realist 
standpoints.  Many  of  the  Popes  were  entirely  in  sympathy  with  this 
Renaissance  ;  several  of  them  opposed  the  pagan  and  materialistic 
degeneration  of  Humanism,  but  none  of  them  accused  the  art  of  the 
Renaissance  of  being  inimical  to  Christianity. 

Its  pagan  and  materialistic  side,  not  content  with  restoring  antique 
knowledge  and  culture  to  modern  humanity,  eagerly  laid  hold  of  the 
whole  intellectual  life  of  a  heathen  time,  together  with  its  ethical 
perceptions,  its  principles  based  on  sensual  pleasure  and  the  joy  of 
living  ;  these  it  sought  to  bring  to  life  again.  This  impulse  was  felt  at 
the  very  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century  ;  since  the  middle  of  the 
century  it  had  ventured  forth  even  more  boldly  in  Florence,  Naples,  Rome 
in  the  days  of  Reggio,  Valla,  Beccadelli,  and  despite  many  a  repulse 
had  even  gained  access  to  the  steps  of  the  Papal  throne.  A  literature 
characterised  by  the -Face^mg,  by  Lorenzo  Valla's  Voluptas  ixndi  Beccadelli's 
Hermapliroditus  could  not  but  shock  respectable  feeling.  Florence  was 
the  headquarters  of  this  school,  and  Lorenzo  il  Magnijico  its  chief  sup- 
porter. Scenes  that  took  place  there  in  his  day  in  the  streets  and 
squares,  the  extravagances  of  the  youth  of  the  city  lost  in  sensuality, 
the  writings  and  pictures  offered  to  the  public,  would  and  must  seem 
to  earnest-minded  Christians  a  sign  of  approaching  dissolution.  A 
reaction  was  both  natural  and  justifiable.  Giovanni  Dominici  had 
introduced  it  at  the  beginning  of  the  century,  and  Fra  Antonino  of  San 
Marco  had  supported  it,  while  Archbishop  of  Florence,  with  the 
authority  of  his  blameless  life  devoted  to  the  service  of  his  fellow-men. 
And  so  Cosimo's  foundation  became  the  centre  and  starting-point  of  a 
movement  destined  to  attack  his  own  House.  At  the  head  of  that 
movement  stood  Fra  Girolamo  Savonarola.  Grief  over  the  degradation 
of  the  Church  had  driven  him  into  a  monastery  and  now  it  led  him 
forth  to  the  pulpits  of  San  Marco  and  Santa  Maria  del  Fiore.  As  a 
youth  he  had  sung  his  dirge  Le  Muina  Ecdesiae  in  a  canzone  since  grown 


Savonarola.  —  The  Platonists 


famous  ;  as  a  man  he  headed  the  battle  against  the  immorality  and 
worldliness  of  the  Curia.  He  was  by  no  means  illiterate,  but  in  the 
pagan  and  sensual  tendency  of  humanist  literature  and  in  the  voluptuous 
freedom  of  art  he  saw  the  source  of  evil,  and  in  Lorenzo  and  his  sons 
pernicious  patrons  of  corruption.  Zeal  against  the  immorality  of  the 
time,  the  worldliness  of  prelates  and  preachers,  made  him  overlook  the 
lasting  gains  that  the  Renaissance  and  humanism  brought  to  humanity. 
He  had  no  sympathy  with  this  development  of  culture  from  the  fresh 
young  life  of  his  own  people.  He  did  not  understand  the  Young  Italy 
of  his  day  ;  behind  this  luxuriant  growth  he  could  not  see  the  good 
and  fruitful  germ,  and  here,  as  in  the  province  of  politics,  he  lost  touch 
with  the  pulse  of  national  life.  His  plan  of  a  theocratic  State  governed 
only  by  Christ,  its  invisible  Head,  was  based  on  momentary  enthusiasm 
and  therefore  untenable.  He  was  too  deficient  in  aesthetic  sense  to  be 
able  to  rise  in  inward  freedom  superior  to  discords.  Like  a  dead  man 
amongst  the  living,  he  left  Italy  to  bear  the  clash  of  those  contradictions 
which  the  great  mind  of  Julius  II  sought,  unhappily  in  vain,  to  fuse 
in  one  conciliatory  scheme. 

Such  a  scheme  of  conciliation  meantime  made  its  appearance  in 
Florence,  not  without  the  co-operation  and  probably  the  encouragement 
of  the  Medici.  It  was  connected  with  the  introduction  of  Platonism, 
which  since  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Florence  in  1438  was  represented 
in  that  city  by  enthusiastic  and  learned  men  like  Bessarion,  and  was 
zealously  furthered  by  Cosimo,  the  Pater  Patriae,  in  the  Academy  which 
he  had  founded.  From  the  learned  societies  started  for  these  purposes 
come  the  first  attempts  to  bring  not  only  Plato's  philosophy  but  the 
whole  of  classical  culture  into  a  close  and  essential  connexion  with 
Christianity.  Platonism  seemed  to  them  the  link  which  joined  Chris- 
tianity with  antiquity.  Bessarion  himself  had  taught  the  internal 
relationship  of  both  principles,  and  Marsilio  Ficino  and  Pico  della 
Mirandola  made  the  explanation  of  this  theory  the  work  of  their  lives. 
If  both  of  them  went  too  far  in  their  youthful  enthusiasm  and  mysticism, 
and  conceived  Christianity  almost  as  a  continuance  of  Attic  philosophy, 
this  was  an  extravagance  which  left  untouched  the  sincerity  of  their 
own  belief,  and  from  which  Marsilio,  when  he  grew  older,  attempted 
to  free  himself.  Giovanni  and  Giulio  de'  Medici,  son  and  nephew 
of  Lorenzo,  were  both  Marsilio's  pupils.  Both  were  destined  to  wear 
the  tiara  and  took  a  decided  part  in  the  scheme  for  conciliating  these 
contrasts,  which  Julius  II  set  forth  by  means  of  Raffaelle's  brush. 

The  victory  of  the  Borgia  over  the  monk  of  San  Marco  was  not 
likely  to  discourage  the  sceptic  and  materialistic  tendency,  whose  worst 
features  were  incarnate  in  Alexander  VI  and  Cesare  Borgia.  Pietro 
Pomponazzo  furthered  it  by  his  notorious  phrase,  that  a  thing  might 
be  true  in  philosophy  and  yet  false  in  theology  ;  a  formula  that  spread 
its  poison  far  and  wide.    Even  then  in  Florence  a  genius  was  developing, 


Castellesi  and  Julius  II 


that  was  to  prove  the  true  incarnation  of  the  pagan  Renaissance  and 
modern  realism.  The  flames  which  closed  over  Savonarola  had  early 
convinced  Niccolo  Machiavelli  that  no  reform  was  to  be  looked  for  from 
Rome. 

Savonarola's  distrust  of  humanism  and  his  harsh  verdict  on  the 
extreme  realism  of  contemporary  art  were  not  extinguished  with  his  life. 
A  few  years  later  we  find  his  thoughts  worked  out,  or  rather  extended 
and  distorted  in  literature.  Castellesi  (Adriano  di  Corneto),  formerly 
secretary  to  Alexander  VI  and  created  Cardinal  May  31,  1503,  wrote 
his  De  vera  philosophia  ex  quattuor  doctorihus  JScelesiae,  in  direct  oppo- 
sition to  the  Renaissance  and  liumanism.  The  author  represents  every 
scientific  pursuit,  indeed  all  human  intellectual  life,  as  useless  for  sal- 
vation, and  even  dangerous.  Dialectics,  astronomy,  geometry,  music, 
and  poetry  are  but  vainglorious  folly.  Aristotle  has  nothing  to  do 
with  Paul,  nor  Plato  with  Peter  ;  all  philosophers  are  damned,  their 
wisdom  vain,  since  it  recognised  but  a  fragment  of  the  truth  and  marred 
even  this  by  misuse.  They  are  the  patriarchs  of  heresy  ;  what  are 
physics,  ethics,  logic  compared  with  the  Holy  Scriptures,  whose  au- 
thority is  greater  than  that  of  all  human  intellect  ? 

The  man  who  wrote  these  things,  and  at  whose  table  Alexander  VI 
contracted  his  last  illness,  was  no  ascetic  and  no  monkish  obscurantist. 
He  was  the  Pope's  confidant  and  quite  at  home  in  all  those  political 
intrigues  which  later  under  Leo  X  brought  ruin  upon  him.  His  book 
can  only  be  regarded  as  a  blow  aimed  at  Julius  II,  Alexander's  old 
enemy,  who  now  wore  the  tiara  and  was  preparing  to  glorify  his 
pontificate  by  the  highest  effort  of  which  Christian  art  was  capable. 
Providence  had  granted  him  for  the  execution  of  his  plans  three  of  the 
greatest  minds  the  world  of  art  has  ever  known  :  never  had  a  monarch 
three  such  men  as  Bramante,  Michelangelo,  and  Raffaelle  at  once  under 
his  sway.  With  their  help  Julius  II  resolved  to  carry  out  his  ideas  for 
the  glory  of  his  pontificate  and  the  exaltation  of  the  Church.  What 
Cardinal  Castellesi  wanted  was  a  downright  rebellion  against  the  Pope  ; 
if  he,  with  his  following  of  obscurantists,  were  acknowledged  to  be  in  the 
right,  all  the  plans  of  the  brilliant  and  energetic  ruler  would  end  in 
failure,  or  else  be  banned  as  worldly,  and  Julius  II  would  lose  the  glory 
of  having  united  the  greatest  and  noblest  achievement  of  art  with  the 
memory  of  his  pontificate  and  the  interests  of  Catholicism. 

The  Pope  gave  Cardinal  Castellesi  his  answer  by  making  the  Vatican 
what  it  is.  The  alteration  and  enlargement  of  the  palace  however  passes 
almost  unnoticed  in  comparison  with  the  rebuilding  of  the  Basilica  of 
St  Peter's,  on  which  the  Pope  was  resolved  since  1505.  With  the  palace 
(1504)  Bramante  seemed  to  have  set  the  crown  on  his  many  works ;  but 
the  plans  for  the  new  cathedral,  with  all  the  sketches  and  alternatives 
which  still  survive  and  have  been  analysed  for  us  with  true  critical 
appreciation,  show  us  Bramante  not  only  in  the  height  of  his  creative 


6  The  conceptions  of  Julius  II  [i503- 

power,  but  as  perhaps  the  most  universal  and  gifted  mind  that  ever  used 
its  mastery  over  architecture.  The  form  of  the  Greek  cross  joined  with 
the  vast  central  cupola  might  be  taken  as  a  fitting  symbol  for  Catholicism. 
The  arms  of  the  cross,  stretched  out  to  the  four  winds,  tell  us  of  the 
doctrine  of  universality ;  the  classical  forms  preferred  by  the  Latin  race, 
the  elevation  with  its  horizontal  lines  accentuated  throughout,  bespeak 
that  principle  of  rest  and  persistence,  which  is  the  true  heritage  of  the 
Catholic  south  in  contradistinction  to  the  restless  striving  in  search  of  a 
visionary  ideal  shown  in  the  vertical  principle  of  the  north.  St  Peter's 
thus,  in  the  development  planned  by  Julius,  presented  the  most  perfect 
picture  of  the  majestic  extension  of  the  Church  ;  but  the  paintings 
and  decorations  of  the  palace  typified  the  conception  of  Christianity, 
humanity  led  to  Christ,  the  evolution  and  great  destiny  of  His  Church, 
and  lastly  the  spiritual  empire  in  which  the  Pope,  along  with  the  greatest 
thinkers  of  his  time,  beheld  the  goal  of  the  Renaissance  and  the  scheme 
of  a  new  and  glorious  future,  showing  Christianity  in  its  fullest  realisation. 

His  own  mausoleum  gives  proof  how  deeply  Julius  II  was  convinced 
that  the  chief  part  in  this  development  fell  to  the  Papacy  in  general, 
and  to  himself,  Giuliano  della  Rovere,  in  particular.  The  instruction 
which  he  gave  to  Michelangelo  to  represent  him  as  Moses  can  bear  but 
one  interpretation  :  that  Julius  set  himself  the  mission  of  leading  forth 
Israel  (the  Church)  from  its  state  of  degradation  and  showing  it  — 
though  he  could  not  grant  possession  —  the  Promised  Land  at  least 
from  afar,  that  blessed  land  which  consists  in  the  enjoyment  of  the 
highest  intellectual  benefits,  and  the  training  and  consecration  of  all 
faculties  of  man's  mind  to  union  with  God.  He  bade  Michelangelo 
depict  on  the  roof  of  the  Sistine  Chapel  (1508-9),  how  after  the  fall 
of  our  first  parents  mankind  was  led  from  afar  towards  this  high  goal  ; 
symbolising  that  shepherding  of  the  soul  to  Christ,  which  Clement 
the  Alexandrine  had  already  seen  and  described.  When  we  see  the 
Sibyls  placed  among  the  Patriarchs  and  Prophets,  we  know  what  this 
meant  in  the  language  of  the  theologians  and  religious  philosophers  of 
that  time.  Not  only  Judaism,  but  also  Graeco-Roman  paganism,  is  an 
antechamber  to  Christianity  ;  and  this  antique  culture  gave  not  merely 
a  negative,  but  also  a  positive  preparation  for  Christ.  For  this  reason 
it  could  not  be  considered  as  a  contradiction  of  the  Christian  con- 
ception :  there  was  a  positive  relationship  between  classical  antiquity 
and  Christianity. 

And  so  at  one  stroke  not  only  the  artist,  but  the  Pope,  who  doubt- 
less planned  and  watched  these  compositions,  took  up  that  mediatory 
and  conciliating  attitude,  which  some  decades  earlier  had  been  adopted 
in  Florence  b}^  Marsilio  and  Pico.  But  we  see  this  thought  more  clearly 
and  far  more  wonderfully  expressed  in  the  Camera  della  Segnatura 
(1509).  If  we  consider  what  place  it  was  that  Raffaelle  was  painting, 
and  the  character  and  individuality  of   the    Pope,    we    cannot   doubt 


-1513]  The  work  of  Jul'ms  II  7 

that  in  these  compositions  also  we  are  concerned,  not  with  the  subjective 
inspiration  of  the  artist  who  executed,  but  with  the  Pope's  own  well- 
considered  and  clearly  formulated  scheme.  In  the  last  few  years  it  has 
been  recognised  that  this  scheme  is  entirely  based  on  the  ideas  of  the 
universe  represented  by  the  Florentine  School.  Especially  it  has  been 
proved  that  the  Scliool  of  Athens  is  drawn  after  the  model  which 
Marsilio  Ficino  left  of  the  Accademia,  the  ancient  assembly  of  philosophers, 
while  Parnassus  has  an  echo  of  that  bella  scuola  of  the  great  poets  of  old 
times,  whom  Dante  met  in  the  Limbo  of  the  Inferno.  The  four  pictures 
of  the  Camera  della  Segnatura  represent  the  aspirations  of  the  soul  of 
man  in  each  of  its  faculties ;  the  striving  of  all  humanity  towards  God 
by  means  of  aesthetic  perception  (^Parnassus'),  the  exercise  of  reason  in 
philosophical  enquiry  and  all  scientific  research  (the  School  of  Athens'), 
order  in  Church  and  State  (^Crift  of  Ecclesiastical  aiid  Secular  Laws), 
and  finally  theology.  The  whole  may  be  summed  up  as  a  pictorial 
representation  of  Pico  della  Mirandola's  celebrated  phrase,  '-'•  philosophia 
veritatem  quaerit,  theologia  invenit,  religio  possidet  "  ;  and  it  corresponds 
with  what  Marsilio  says  in  his  Academy  of  Noble  Minds  when  he  charac- 
terises our  life's  work  as  an  ascent  to  the  angels  and  to  God. 

These  compositions  are  the  highest  to  which  Christian  art  has 
attained,  and  the  thoughts  which  they  express  are  one  of  the  greatest 
achievements  of  the  Papacy.  The  principle  elsewhere  laid  down  is  here 
reaffirmed :  that  the  reception  of  the  true  Renaissance  into  the  circle 
of  ecclesiastical  thought  points  to  a  widening  of  the  limited  medieval 
conception  into  universality,  and  indicates  a  transition  to  entire  and 
actual  Catholicity,  like  the  great  step  taken  by  Paul,  when  he  turned  to 
the  Gentiles  and  released  the  community  from  the  limits  of  Judaistic 
teaching. 

This  expansion  and  elevation  of  the  intellectual  sphere  is  the  most 
glorious  achievement  of  Julius  II  and  of  the  Papacy  at  the  beginning  of 
modern  times.  It  must  not  only  be  remembered,  but  placed  in  the  most 
prominent  position,  when  history  sums  up  this  chapter  in  human  de- 
velopment. Since  Luther's  time  it  has  been  the  custom  to  consider  the 
Papacy  of  the  Renaissance  almost  exclusively  as  viewed  by  theologians 
who  emphasised  only  moral  defects  in  the  representativesof  this  institution 
and  the  neglect  of  ecclesiastical  reform.  Certainly  these  are  important 
considerations,  and  our  further  deductions  will  prove  that  we  do  not 
neglect  them  nor  underestimate  their  immense  significance  for  the  life  of 
the  Church  and  Catholic  unity.  But  from  this  standpoint  we  can  never 
succeed  in  grasping  the  situation.  Ranke  in  his  Welfgeschichte  could 
write  the  history  of  the  first  hundred  years  of  the  Roman  Empire,  with- 
out giving  one  word  to  all  the  scandalous  tales  that  Suetonius  records. 
The  course  of  universal  history  ^nd  the  importance  of  the  Empire  for 
the  wide  provinces  of  the  Roman  world  were  little  influenced  by  them. 
Similarly,  private  faults  of  the  Renaissance  Popes  were  fateful  for  the 


8  Christianity  and  the  Renaissance  [i503- 

moral  life  of  the  Church,  but  the  question  of  what  the  Papacy  was  and 
meant  for  these  times,  is  not  summed  up  or  determined  by  them.  It  is 
the  right  of  these  Popes  to  be  judged  by  the  better  and  happier  sides  of 
their  government ;  tlie  historian  who  portrays  them  should  not  be  less 
skilful  than  the  great  masters  of  the  Renaissance,  who  in  their  portraits 
of  the  celebrities  of  their  time  contrived  to  bring  out  the  sitter's  best 
and  most  characteristic  qualities.  Luther  was  not  touched  in  the  least 
degree  by  the  artistic  development  of  his  time ;  brought  up  amid  the 
peasant  life  of  Saxony  and  Thuringia  he  had  no  conception  of  the  whole 
world  that  lay  between  Dante  and  Michelangelo,  and  could  not  see  that 
the  eminence  of  the  Papacy  consisted  at  that  time  in  its  leadership  of 
Europe  in  the  province  of  art.  But  to  deny  this  now  would  be  injustice 
to  the  past. 

The  Medici  had  not  stood  aloof  from  this  evolution,  which  reached  its 
highest  point  under  Julius  II.  Search  has  been  made  for  the  bridge  by 
means  of  which  the  ideas  of  Marsilio  and  his  fellow  thinkers  were  brought 
from  Florence  to  Rome.  But  there  is  no  real  need  to  guess  at  definite 
personages.  Hundreds  of  correspondents  had  long  since  made  all  Italy 
familiar  with  this  school  of  thought.  Among  those  who  frequented  the 
Court  of  Rome,  Castiglione,  Bibbiena,  Sadoleto,  Inghirami,  andBeroaldus 
had  been  educated  in  the  spirit  of  Marsilio.  His  old  friend  and  corre- 
spondent Raffaelle  Riario  was  now,  as  Cardinal  of  San  Giorgio  and  the 
Pope's  cousin,  one  of  the  )nost  influential  personages  in  the  Vatican. 
But  before  all  we  must  remember  Giovanni  de'  Medici  and  his  cousin 
Giulio,  the  future  Popes.  They  were  Marsilio's  pupils,  and  after  the 
banishment  of  their  family  he  remained  their  friend  and  corresponded 
with  them,  regarding  them  as  the  true  heirs  of  Lorenzo's  spirit ;  Raffaelle 
has  represented  the  older  cousin  Giovanni  standing  near  Julius  II  in  the 
Bestowal  of  Spiritual  Laws. 

It  was  a  kingdom  of  intellectual  unity,  which  the  brush  of  the 
greatest  of  painters  was  commissioned  to  paint  on  the  walls  of  the 
Camera  della  Segjiatura;  the  same  idea  which  Julius  caused  to  be  pro- 
claimed in  1512,  in  the  opening  speech  of  Aegidius  of  Viterbo  at  the 
Lateran  Council,  referring  to  the  classical  proverb:  "aTrXoO?  6  ixvdo<i  r?}? 
a\r]deia<;  ecfyv  —  simplex  sermo  veritatis."  The  world  of  the  beautiful,  of 
reason  and  science,  of  political  and  social  order,  had  its  place  appointed 
in  the  kingdom  of  God  upon  earth.  A  limit  was  set  to  the  neglect  of 
secular  efforts  to  explore  nature  and  history,  to  the  disregard  of  poetry 
and  art,  and  its  rights  were  granted  to  healthy  human  reason  organised 
in  the  State  ;  G-ratiae  et  Musae  a  Deo  sunt  atque  ad  Deum  referendae,  as 
Marsilio  had  said. 

The  programme  laid  down  by  Julius  II,  had  it  been  carried  out, 
might  have  saved  Italy  and  preserved  the  Catholic  principle,  when 
imperilled  in  the  North.  The  task  was  to  bring  modern  culture  into 
harmony  with  Christianity,  to  unite  the  work  of  the  Renaissance,  so  far 


-1513]  Services  of  Julius  9 

as  it  was  really  sound  and  progressive,  Avith  ecclesiastical  practice  and 
tradition  into  one  harmonious  whole.  The  recognition  of  the  rights  of 
intellectual  activity,  of  the  ideal  creations  of  human  fancy,  and  of  the 
conception  of  the  State,  were  the  basis  for  this  union.  It  remains  to  be 
shown  why  the  attempt  proved  fruitless. 

The  reign  of  Julius  II  was  one  long  struggle.  The  sword  never  left 
his  grasp,  which  was  more  used  to  the  handling  of  weapons  than  of  Holy 
Writ.  On  the  whole,  the  Pope  might  at  the  close  of  his  pontificate  be 
contented  with  the  success  of  his  politics.  He  had  driven  the  French 
from  Italy,  and  the  retreat  of  Louis  XII  from  Lombardy  opened  the 
gates  of  Florence  once  more  to  the  Medici.  The  Council  of  Pisa,  for 
which  France  had  used  her  influence,  had  come  to  naught,  and  its 
remnant  was  scattered  before  the  anger  of  the  victorious  Pontiff.  And 
as  he  had  freed  Italy  from  the  ascendancy  of  France  so  he  now  hoped  to 
throw  off  that  of  Spain.  It  may  be  a  legend  that  as  he  was  dying  he 
murmured  "  Fiiori  i  harhari^''''  but  these  words  certainly  were  the  expres- 
sion of  his  political  thought.  But  this  second  task  was  not  within 
his  power.  On  the  3rd  of  May,  1512,  he  had  opened  the  Lateran 
Council  to  counteract  that  of  Pisa.  At  first  none  of  the  great  Powers 
was  represented  there :  15  Cardinals,  14  Patriarchs,  10  Archbishops, 
and  57  Bishops,  all  of  them  Italians,  with  a  few  heads  of  monastic  Orders, 
formed  this  assembly,  which  was  called  the  Fifth  General  Lateran  Council. 
Neither  Julius  nor  Leo  was  ever  able  to  convince  the  world  that  this 
was  an  ecumenical  assembly  of  Christendom.  Julius  died  in  the  night  of 
February  20-1,  1513.  Guicciardini  calls  him  a  ruler  unsurpassed  in 
power  and  endurance,  but  violent  and  without  moderation.  Elsewhere 
he  says  that  he  had  nothing  of  a  priest  but  vesture  and  title.  The 
dialogue,  Julius  Uzclusus,  attributed  sometimes  to  Hutten,  sometimes 
to  Erasmus,  and  perhaps  written  by  Fausto  Andrelini,  is  the  harshest 
condemnation  of  the  Pope  and  his  reign  ("  0 pTireneticum,  sed  mundanum, 
ne  mundanum  quidem,  sed  Etlmicum^  imo  Ethnicis  sceleratiorem  :  gloriaris 
te  pliirimum  potuisse  ad  discindenda  foedera,  ad  infiammanda  bella,  ad 
strages  hominuniexcitandas''}.  But  at  bottom  the  pamphlet  is  exceedingly 
one-sided  and  the  outcome  of  French  party-spirit.  Although  in  many 
cases  the  author  speaks  the  truth,  and  for  instance  even  at  that  time 
(1513)  unfortunately  was  able  to  put  such  words  into  the  Pope's  mouth 
as  "  Nos  Eeclesiam  vocamus  sacras  aedes,  sacerdotes,  et  praecijjue  Curiam 
Momanam,  me  imprimis^  qui  caput  sum  Ecclesiae,^''  yet  this  is  more  a 
common  trait  of  the  office  than  a  characteristic  of  Julius  II.  It  almost 
raises  a  smile  to  read  in  Pallavicino,  that  on  his  death-bed  the  mag- 
nanimity of  Julius  was  only  equalled  by  his  piety,  and  that,  although 
he  had  not  possessed  every  priestly  perfection  —  perhaps  because  of  his 
natural  inclinations,  or  because  of  the  age,  which  had  not  yet  been  disci- 
plined by  the  Council  of  Trent  —  yet  his  greatest  mistake  had  been  made 


10  Election  of  Leo  X  [1513- 

with  tlie  best  intention  and  proved  disastrous  by  a  mere  chance,  when, 
as  Head  of  the  Church,  and  at  the  same  time  as  a  mighty  Prince,  he 
undertook  a  work  that  for  these  very  reasons  exceeded  the  means  of  his 
treasury  —  the  buikling  of  St.  Peter's.  We  see  that  neither  his  enemies 
nor  his  apologists  had  the  least  idea  wherein  Julius'  true  greatness  con- 
sisted. With  such  divided  opinions  it  cannot  surprise  us  that  contem- 
poraries and  coming  generations  alike  found  it  difficult  to  form  a  reasoned 
and  final  judgment  of  the  pontificate  which  immediately  followed. 

Cardinal  Giovanni  de'  Medici  came  forth  from  the  conclave  sum- 
moned on  March  4,  1513,  as  Pope  Leo  X.  Since  Piero  had  been 
drowned  on  the  9th  of  December,  1503,  Giovanni  had  become  the  head 
of  the  House  of  Medici.  He  was  only  38  years  of  age  at  the  election,  to 
which  he  had  had  himself  conveyed  in  a  litter  from  Florence  to  Rome, 
suffering  from  fistula.  The  jest  on  his  shortsightedness,  "  multi  caeci 
Cardinales  creavere  caecum  decimum  Leonem^''  by  no  means  expressed 
public  opinion,  which  rejoiced  at  his  accession.  The  Posse sso,  which 
took  place  on  April  11th,  with  the  great  procession  to  the  Lateran,  was 
the  most  brilliant  spectacle  of  its  kind  that  Christian  Rome  had  ever 
witnessed.  What  was  expected  of  Leo  was  proclaimed  in  the  inscription 
which  Agostino  Chigi  had  attached  to  his  house  for  the  occasion : 

"  Olim  habuit  Cypris  sua  tempora,  tempera  flavors 
Olim  habuit,  sua  nunc  tempora  Pallas  habet.'''' 

But  other  expectations  were  not  wanting  and  a  certain  goldsmith 
gave  voice  to  them  in  the  line : 

"  Mars  fuit ;  est  Pallas  ;  Cypria  semper  ero." 

To  Leo  X  the  century  owed  its  name.  The  Saecla  Leonis  have  been 
called  the  Saecla  Aurea,  and  his  reign  has  been  compared  with  that  of 
Augustus.  Erasmus,  who  saw  him  in  Rome  in  1507  and  1509,  praises 
his  kindness  and  humanity,  his  magnanimity  and  his  learning,  the 
indescribable  charm  of  his  speech,  his  love  of  peace  and  of  the  fine  arts, 
which  cause  no  sighs,  no  tears ;  he  places  him  as  high  above  all  his 
predecessors  as  Peter's  Chair  is  above  all  thrones  in  the  world.  Palla- 
vicino  says  of  Leo  that  he  was  well-known  for  his  kindness  of  heart, 
learned  in  all  sciences,  and  had  passed  his  youth  in  the  greatest  innocence. 
That  as  Pope  he  let  himself  be  blinded  by  appearances,  which  often 
confuse  the  good  with  the  great,  and  chose  rather  the  applause  of  the 
crowd  than  the  prosperity  of  the  nation,  and  thus  was  tempted  to 
exercise  too  magnificent  a  generosity.  Such  expressions  from  one  who 
is  the  unconditional  apologist  of  all  the  Popes  cannot  make  much 
impression,  but  it  is  noticeable  that  even  Sarpi  says :  "  Leo,  noble  by 
birth  and  education,  brought  many  aptitudes  to  the  Papacy,  especially 
a  remarkable  knowledge  of  classical  literature,  humanity,  kindness,  the 
greatest  liberality,  an  avowed  intention  of  supporting  artists  and  learned 


-1521  ]  Estimates  of  Leo  11 

men,  Avho  for  many  years  had  enjoyed  no  such  favour  in  the  Holy  See. 
He  would  have  made  an  ideal  Pope  had  he  added  to  these  qualities 
some  knowledge  of  the  things  of  religion,  and  a  little  more  inclination 
to  piety,  both  of  them  things  for  which  he  cared  little." 

The  favourable  opinion  entertained  of  Leo  X  by  his  contemporaries 
long  held  the  field  in  history.  His  reign  has  been  regarded  as  at  once 
the  zenith  and  cause  of  the  greatest  period  of  the  Renaissance.  His 
wide  liberality,  his  unfeigned  enthusiasm  for  the  creations  of  genius,  his 
unprejudiced  taste  for  all  that  beautifies  humanity,  and  his  sympathy 
for  all  the  culture  of  his  time  have  been  the  theme  of  a  traditional 
chorus  of  laudation.  More  recent  criticism  has  recognised  in  the  reign 
of  Leo  a  period  of  incipient  decline,  and  has  traced  that  decline  to  the 
follies  and  frailties  of  the  Pontiff. 

With  regard  to  the  political  methods  of  Leo  some  difference  of 
opinion  may  still  be  entertained.  Some  have  seen  in  him  the  single- 
minded  and  unscrupulous  friend  of  Medicean  Florence,  prepared  to 
sacrifice  alike  the  interests  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Papacy  to  the 
advancement  of  his  family.  To  others  he  is  the  clear-sighted  statesman 
who,  perceiving  the  future  changes  and  difficulties  of  the  Church,  sought 
for  the  Papacy  the  firm  support  of  a  hereditary  alliance. 

Truth  may  lie  midway  between  these  two  opinions.  If  we  view  Leo 
as  a  man,  similar  doubts  encounter  us.  Paramount  in  his  character  were 
his  gentleness  and  cheerfulness,  his  good-nature,  his  indulgence  both  for 
himself  and  others,  his  love  of  peace  and  hatred  of  war.  But  these 
amiable  qualities  were  coupled  with  an  insincerity  and  a  love  of  tortuous 
ways  which  grew  to  be  a  second  nature.  Nor  must  we  overlook  the  fact 
that  Leo's  policy  of  peace  was  a  mere  illusion;  his  hopes  and  intentions 
were  quite  frustrated  by  the  actual  course  of  affairs.  On  his  personal 
character  the  great  blot  must  rest  that  he  passed  his  life  in  intellectual 
self-indulgence  and  took  his  pleasure  in  hunting  and  gaming,  while  the 
Teutonic  North  was  bursting  the  bonds  of  reverence  and  authority  which 
bound  Europe  to  Rome.  Even  for  the  restoration  of  the  rule  of  the 
Medici  in  Florence  the  Medicean  Popes  made  only  futile  attempts. 
Cosimo  I  was  the  first  to  accomplish  it.  Leo  had  absorbed  the  culture 
of  his  time,  but  he  did  not  possess  the  ability  to  look  beyond  that  time. 
A  diplomatist  rather  than  a  statesman,  his  creations  were  only  the 
feats  of  a  political  virtuoso,  who  sacrificed  the  future  in  order  to  control 
the  present. 

Even  the  greatness  of  the  Maecenas  crumbles  before  recent  criticism. 
The  zenith  of  Renaissance  culture  falls  in  the  age  of  Julius  II.  Ariosto's 
light  verses,  Bibbiena's  prurient  La  Calandria,  the  paintings  in  the 
bath-room  of  the  Vatican,  the  rejection  of  the  Dante  monument  planned 
by  Michelangelo,  the  misapplication  of  funds  collected  for  the  Crusade 
to  purposes  of  mere  dynastic  interest,  Leo's  political  double-dealing, 
which  disordered  all  the  affairs  of  Italy,  and  indeed  of  Christendom  ; 


12  Leo  X  as  jpatron  of  art  and  literature  [ioi3- 

all  this  must  shake  our  faith  in  him  as  protector  of  the  good  and 
beautiful  in  art.  His  portrait  by  Raffaelle,  with  its  intelligent  but 
cold  and  sinister  face,  may  assist  to  destroy  any  illusions  which  we  may 
have  had  about  his  j)ersonality. 

The  harshness  and  violence  of  Leo's  greater  predecessor,  Julius, 
brought  down  on  him  the  hatred  of  his  contemporaries  and  won  for  his 
successor  an  immense  popularity  without  further  effort.  The  spiritual 
heir  of  Lorenzo  il  Magnifico,  Rome  and  all  Italy  acclaimed  Leo  pads 
restauratorem^  feUeissimum  Utteratorum  amatorem ;  and  Erasmus  pro- 
claimed to  the  world  that  "  an  age,  worse  than  that  of  iron,  was  suddenly 
transformed  into  one  of  gold."  And  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  when 
Leo  X  was  greeted  on  his  accession,  like  Titus,  as  the  deliciae  generis 
humayii  he  made  every  disposition  to  respond  to  these  expectations 
and  prove  himself  the  most  liberal  of  patrons.  The  Pope,  however,  did 
not  long  keep  this  resolution ;  his  weakness  of  purpose,  his  inclination 
to  luxury,  enjoyment,  and  pleasures,  soon  quenched  his  sense  of  the 
gravity  of  life  and  all  his  higher  perceptions ;  so  that  a  swift  and  sad 
decline  followed  on  the  first  promise. 

On  Leo's  accession  he  found  a  number  of  great  public  buildings  in 
progress  which  had  been  begun  under  his  great  predecessor  but  were 
still  unfinished.  Among  them  were  the  colossal  palace  planned  by 
Bramante  in  the  Via  Giulia,  St  Peter's  also  begun  by  him,  and  his  work 
of  joining  the  Vatican  with  the  Belvedere,  besides  the  loggie  and 
buildings  in  Loreto.  Leo,  who  was  not  in  the  least  affected  by  the 
passion  of  building  —  il  mat  di  pietra  —  did  not  carry  on  these  under- 
takings. He  even  hindered  Michelangelo  from  finishing  the  tomb  of 
Julius  II,  so  little  reverence  had  he  for  the  memory  of  the  Pope  to 
whom  he  owed  his  own  position.  Only  the  loggie  were  finished, 
since  they  could  not  remain  as  Bramante  had  left  them.  Even  after 
Bramante's  death  there  was  no  lack  of  architects  who  could  have 
finished  St  Peter's.  Besides  Raffaelle,  who  succeeded  to  his  post  as 
architect,  Sangallo  and  Sansovino,  Peruzzi  and  Giuliano  Leno  waited 
in  vain  for  commissions.  While  Raffaelle  in  a  letter  relates  that  the 
Pope  had  set  aside  60,000  ducats  a  year  for  the  continuation  of  the 
building,  and  talked  to  Era  Giocondo  about  it  every  day,  he  might 
soon  after  have  told  how  Leo  went  no  further,  but  stopped  at  the  good 
intention.  As  a  matter  of  fact  work  almost  entirely  ceased  because  the 
money  was  not  forthcoming.  There  is  therefore  no  reason  to  reproach 
Raffaelle  with  the  delay  in  building.  On  the  contrary,  by  not  pressing 
Leo  to  an  energetic  prosecution  of  the  work,  Raffaelle  probably  did  the 
building  the  greatest  service  ;  since  the  Pope's  mind  was  full  of  plans, 
for  which  Bramante's  great  ideas  would  have  been  entirely  forsaken.  No 
one  could  see  more  clearly  than  Raffaelle  the  harm  which  would  have 
thus  resulted. 

Leo  X  not  only  neglected  the  undertakings  of  his  predecessor ;  he 


-io2i]  Architecture,  sculpture,  and  painting  13 

created  nothing  new  in  the  way  of  monumental  buildings  beyond  the 
portico  of  the  Navicella,  and  a  few  pieces  of  restoration  in  San  Cosimate 
and  St  John  Lateran.  The  work  he  had  done  beyond  the  walls  in  his 
villas  and  hunting  lodges  (in  Magliana,  at  Palo,  Montalto,  and  Monte- 
fiascone)  served  only  the  purposes  of  his  pleasure.  Of  the  more  important 
palaces  built  in  the  city  two  fall  to  the  account  of  his  relatives  Lorenzo 
and  Giulio,  that  of  the  Lanti  (Piazza  de'  Caprettari)  and  the  beautiful 
Villa  Madama  on  the  Monte  Mario,  begun  by  Raffaelle,  Giulio  Ro- 
mano, and  Giovanni  da  Udine,  but  never  finished.  Cardinal  Giulio  de' 
Medici  it  was  who  carried  on  the  building  of  the  Sacristy  in  San  Lorenzo 
at  Florence,  in  which  Michelangelo  was  to  place  the  tombs  of  Giuliano 
and  Lorenzo  ;  but  the  fa^-ade  which  the  Pope  had  planned  for  the  church 
was  never  executed.  Nor  were  any  of  the  palaces  built  by  dignitaries 
of  the  Church  under  Leo  X  of  importance,  with  the  exceptions  of 
a  part  of  the  Palazzo  Farnese  and  the  Palazzo  di  Venezia.  Even  the 
palaces  and  dwelling-houses  built  by  Andrea  Sansovino,  Sangallo,  and 
Raffaelle  will  not  bear  comparison  with  the  creations  of  the  previous 
pontificate,  nor  with  the  later  parts  of  the  Palazzo  Farnese  at  Caprarola. 

Sculpture  had  flourished  under  Pius  II  in  the  days  when  Mino  of 
Fiesole  and  Paolo  Romano  were  in  Rome  ;  it  could  point  to  very  hon- 
ourable achievements  under  Alexander  VI  and  Julius  II  (Andrea  San- 
sovino's  monuments  of  the  Cardinals  Basso  and  Sforza  in  Santa  Maria 
del  Popolo)  ;  but  this  art  also  declined  under  Leo  X  ;  for  the  work 
done  by  Andrea  Sansovino  in  Loreto  under  his  orders  falls  in  the  time 
of  Clement  VII,  after  whose  death  in  153-4  the  greater  part  of  the 
plastic  ornament  of  the  Santa  Casa  was  executed.  The  cardinals  and 
prelates  who  died  in  Rome  between  1513  and  1521  received  only  poor 
and  insignificant  monuments,  and  Leo's  colossal  statue  in  Ara  Cell,  the 
work  of  Domenico  d'Amio,  can  only  be  called  a  soulless  monstrosity. 

Painting  flourished  more  under  this  Pope,  who  certainly  was  a 
faithful  patron  and  friend  to  Raffaelle.  The  protection  he  showed  to 
this  great  master  is  and  always  will  be  Leo's  best  and  noblest  title  to 
fame.  But  he  allowed  Leonardo  to  go  to  France,  when  after  Bramante's 
death  he  might  easily  have  won  him,  had  he  bestowed  on  him  the  post 
of  piovihatore  apogtoUco,  instead  of  giving  it  to  his  maitre  de  plaisirs,  the 
slvaXlov^-minded  Frsi  Murmno  (sannio  cucullatus}.  He  allowed  Michel- 
angelo to  return  to  Florence,  and,  though  he  loaded  Raffaelle  with 
honours,  it  is  a  fact  that  he  was  five  years  behindhand  with  the  payment 
of  his  salary  as  architect  of  St  Peter's.  A  letter  of  Messer  Baldassare 
Turini  da  Pescia  turns  on  the  ridiculous  investiture  of  the  jester  Mariano 
with  the  tojiaca  of  Bramante,  performed  by  the  Pope  himself  when 
Bramante  was  scarce  cold  in  his  grave.  This  leaves  a  most  painful  impres- 
sion, and  makes  it  very  doubtful  whether  Leo  ever  took  his  patronage  of 
the  arts  very  seriously.  In  the  same  way  his  love  of  peace  is  shown  in  a 
very  strange  light  during  the  latter  half  of  his  reign  by  the  high-handed 


14  Decadence  of  art  under  Leo  X  [l5l3- 

campaign  against  the  Duke  of  Urbino  (1516)  ;  the  menace  to  Ferrara 
(1519)  ;  the  crafty  enticing  of  Giampaolo  Baglione,  Lord  of  Perugia,  to 
Rome  and  his  murder  despite  the  safe-conduct  promised  him  ;  the  war 
against  Ludovico  Freducci,  Lord  of  Fermo  ;  the  annexation  of  the  towns 
and  fortresses  in  the  province  of  Ancona  ;  the  attempt  on  the  life  of  the 
Duke  of  Ferrara  ;  the  betrayal  of  Francis  I  and  the  league  with  Charles  V 
in  1521.  The  senseless  extravagance  of  the  Court,  the  constant  succession 
of  very  mundane  festivals,  hunting-parties,  and  other  amusements,  left 
Leo  in  continual  embarrassment  for  money  and  led  him  into  debt  not 
only  to  all  the  bankers  but  to  his  own  officials.  They  even  drove  him 
to  unworthy  extortion,  such  as  followed  on  the  conspiracy  of  Cardinal 
Petrucci  and  the  pardon  granted  to  his  accomplices,  or  that  which  was 
his  motive  for  the  creation  of  thirty-one  cardinals  in  a  single  day. 

All  this  taken  together  brings  us  to  the  conclusion  that  Leo's  one 
real  merit  was  his  patronage  of  Raffaelle.  Despite  the  noble  and 
generous  way  in  which  his  reign  began  the  Pope  soon  fell  into  an 
effeminate  life  of  self-indulgence  spent  among  players  and  buffoons,  a 
life  rich  in  undignified  farce  and  offensive  jests,  but  poor  in  every  kind 
of  positive  achievement.  The  Pope  laughed,  hunted,  and  gambled  ;  he 
enjoyed  the  papacy.  Had  he  not  said  to  his  brother  Giuliano  on  his 
accession  :  "  Grodiamoci  il  papato  poiche  Dio  ci  V  ha  dato  ?  "  Though  he 
himself  has  not  been  accused  of  sensual  excesses  the  moral  sense  of  the 
Pope  could  not  be  delicate  when  he  found  fit  to  amuse  himself  with 
indecent  comedies  like  La  Calandria,  and  on  April  30, 1518,  attended 
the  Avedding  of  Agostino  Chigi  with  his  concubine  of  many  years' 
standing,  himself  placing  the  ring  on  the  hand  of  the  bride,  already 
mother  of  a  large  family. 

Nor  can  Leo's  reign,  apart  from  his  own  share  in  it,  be  regarded  as 
the  best  period  of  the  Renaissance.  The  great  masters  had  done  their 
best  work  before  1513.  Bramante  died  at  the  beginning  of  Leo's 
pontificate,  Michelangelo  had  painted  the  Sistine  Chapel  from  1508  to 
1512,  Leonardo  the  Oena  in  1496,  Raffaelle  the  Stayiza  della  Segnatura, 
1508-11.  The  later  Stanze  are  far  inferior  to  that  masterpiece  ;  the 
work  of  his  pupils  comes  more  to  the  fore  in  the  execution  of  the 
paintings.  And  in  his  own  work,  as  also  in  that  of  Michelangelo, 
the  germ  of  decadence  is  already  visible,  and  a  slight  tendency  to 
harocco  style  is  to  be  seen  in  both.  The  autumn  wind  is  blowing,  and 
the  first  leaves  begin  to  fall. 

The  truth  results  that  the  zenith  of  Renaissance  art  falls  in  the  time 
between  1496  and  1512,  during  which  the  Last  Supper,  the  roof  of 
the  Sistine  Chapel,  and  the  Stanza  della  Segnatura  were  painted,  and 
Bramante's  plans  for  St  Peter's  were  drawn  up.  We  can  even  mark  a 
narrower  limit,  and  say  that  the  four  wall  paintings  of  the  Stanza  della 
Segnatura  mark  the  point  at  which  medieval  and  modern  thought  touch 
one  another  ;  the  narrow  medieval  world  ceases,  the  modern  world  stands 


-1521  ]  Literature  under  Leo  X  15 

before  us  developed  in  all  its  fulness  and  freedom.  One  may  indeed 
doubt  whether  all  the  meaning  of  this  contrast  was  quite  clear  to  the 
mind  of  Julius  II ;  but  after  all  that  is  a  matter  of  secondary  importance. 
For  it  is  not  the  individual  who  decides  in  such  matters  ;  without  being 
aware  of  it  he  is  borne  on  by  his  time  and  must  execute  the  task  that 
history  has  laid  upon  him.  Great  men  of  all  times  are  those  who  have 
understood  the  cry  from  the  inmost  heart  of  a  whole  nation  or  genera- 
tion, and,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  have  accomplished  what  the  hour 
demanded. 

It  has  been  in  like  manner  represented  that  literature  passed  through 
a  golden  age  under  Leo  X ;  but  considerable  deductions  must  be  made 
from  the  undiscriminating  eulogies  of  earlier  writers. 

Erasmus  has  reflected  in  his  letters  the  great  impression  made  by 
Rome,  the  true  seat  and  home  of  all  Latin  culture.  Well  might 
Cardinal  Raffaelle  Riario  write  to  him :  "  Everyone  who  has  a  name  in 
science  throngs  hither.  Each  has  a  fatherland  of  his  own,  but  Rome  is 
a  common  fatherland,  a  foster-mother,  and  a  comforter  to  all  men  of 
learning."  It  is  long  since  these  words  were  written  —  far  too  long  for 
the  honour  of  Catholicism  and  of  the  Papacy.  But  at  that  time,  under 
Julius  II,  they  were  really  true.  A  circle  of  highly  cultured  cardinals 
and  nobles,  Riario,  Grimani,  Adriano  di  Corneto,  Farnese,  Giovanni  de' 
Medici  himself  in  his  beautiful  Palazzo  Madama,  his  brother  Giuliano  il 
Mac/nifico,  and  his  cousin  Giulio,  afterwards  Clement  VII,  gathered 
poets  and  learned  men  about  them,  that  dotta  compagnia  of  which 
Ariosto  spoke;  to  them  they  opened  their  libraries  and  collections. 
Clubs  were  formed  which  met  at  the  houses  of  Angelo  Colocci,  Alberto 
Rio  di  Carpi,  Goritz,  or  Savoja.  The  poets  and  pamphleteers,  to 
whom  Arsilli  dedicated  his  poem  De  Poetis  Urbanis,  gave  vent  to  their 
wit  on  Pasquino  or  on  Sansovino's  statue  in  Sant'  Agostino.  They  met  in 
the  salons  of  the  beautiful  Imperia,  in  the  banks  described  by  Bandello, 
among  them  Beroaldo  the  j^ounger,  who  sang  the  praises  of  that  most 
celebrated  of  modern  courtesans ;  Fedro  Inghiriami,  the  friend  of  Erasmus 
and  Raffaelle  ;  Colocci,  and  even  the  serious  Sadoleto.  It  is  characteristic 
of  this  time,  which  placed  wit  and  beauty  above  morals,  that  when 
Imperia  died  at  the  age  of  twenty-six  she  received  an  honourable  burial 
in  the  chapel  of  San  Gregorio,  and  her  epitaph  praised  the  "  Cortimna 
Romana  quae,  digna  tanto  nomine,  rarae  inter  homines  formae  specimen 
dedit.'"  And  although  women  no  longer  played  so  prominent  a  part  at 
the  papal  Court  as  they  had  done  under  Innocent  VIII  and  Alexander  VI, 
yet,  as  Bibbiena  wrote  to  Giuliano  de'  Medici,  the  arrival  of  noble  ladies 
was  extremely  welcome  as  bringing  with  it  something  of  a  carte  de  donne. 

The  activity  of  the  greater  number  of  literary  men  and  wits,  whose 
names  have  most  contributed  to  the  glory  of  Leo's  pontificate,  dates 
back  to  Giulio's  time ;  so  for  instance  Molza,  Vida,  Giovio,  Valeriano, 
whose  dialogue  De  Infelicitate  Litteratorum  tells  of  the  fate  of  many  of 


16  Merits  of  Leo  [1513- 

his  friends,  Porzio,  Cappella,  Bembo,  who  as  Latinist  was  the  chief 
representative  of  the  cult  of  Cicero,  and  as  a  writer  in  the  vulgar  tongue 
gave  Italy  her  prose,  and  Sadoleto,  who  chronicled  the  discovery  of  the 
Laocoon  group.  Pontano  too  and  Sannazaro,  Fracastan,  and  Navagero 
had  already  done  their  best  work. 

Nothing  could  be  more  unjust  than  to  deny  that  Giovanni  de'  Medici 
himself  had  a  highly  cultured  mind  and  an  excellent  knowledge  of 
literature.  It  may  be  that  Lorenzo  had  destined  him  for  the  Papacy 
from  his  birth ;  certainly  he  gave  him  the  most  liberal  education.  He 
gave  him  Poliziano,  Marsilio,  Pico  della  Mirandola,  Johannes  Argyro- 
poulos,  Gentile  d'  Arezzo  for  his  teachers  and  constant  companions,  and, 
to  teach  him  Greek,  Demetrius  Chalcondylas,  and  Petrus  Aegineta. 
Afterwards  Bernardo  di  Dovizi  (Bibbiena)  was  his  best  known  tutor. 
In  helles  lettres  Giovanni  had  made  an  attempt  with  Greek  verses,  none 
of  which  have  survived.  Of  his  Latin  poems  the  only  examples  handed 
down  to  us  are  the  hendecasyllables  on  the  statue  of  Lucrezia  and  an 
elegant  epigram,  written  during  his  pontificate,  on  the  death  of  Celso 
Mellini,  well  known  for  his  lawsuit  in  1519  and  his  tragic  death  by 
drowning. 

Nor  can  it  be  denied  that  the  opening  years  of  this  pontificate  were 
of  great  promise,  and  seemed  to  announce  a  fresh  impetus,  or,  to  speak 
more  exactly,  the  successful  continuation  of  what  had  long  since  begun. 
Amongst  the  men  whom  the  young  Pope  gathered  round  him  were 
many  of  excellent  understanding  and  character,  such  as  the  Milanese 
Agostino  Trivulzio,  who  later  on  was  to  do  Clement  signal  service, 
Alessandro  Cesarini,  Andrea  della  Valle,  Paolo  Emilio  Cesi,  Baldassare 
Turini,  Tommaso  de  Vio,  Lorenzo  Campeggi,  the  noble  Ludovico 
di  Canossa,  from  Verona,  most  of  whom  wore  the  cardinal's  hat. 
Bembo  and  Sadoleto  were  the  chief  ornaments  of  his  literary  circle ; 
to  them  was  added  the  celebrated  Greek  John  Lascaris,  once  under 
the  protection  of  Bessarion,  then  of  Lorenzo  il  Magnifico  and  Louis  XII, 
in  France  the  teacher  of  Budaeus,  in  Venice  of  Erasmus.  Leo  X  on  his 
accession  at  once  summoned  him  to  Rome,  and  on  his  account  founded 
a  school  of  Greek  in  the  palace  of  the  Cardinal  of  Sion  on  Monte 
Cavallo.  Lascaris'  pupil,  Marcus  Musurus,  was  also  summoned  from 
Venice  in  1516  to  assist  in  this  school.  At  the  same  time  the  Pope  com- 
missioned Beroaldus  to  publish  the  newly-discovered  writings  of  Tacitus. 
A  measure,  which  might  have  proved  of  the  utmost  importance,  was 
the  foundation  of  the  university  of  Rome  by  the  Bull  Bum  Suavissimos 
of  November  4,  1513.  This  was  a  revival  and  confirmation  of  an  already 
existing  Academ}^  in  which  under  Alexander  VI  and  Julius  II  able  men 
such  as  Beroaldo  the  younger,  Fedro,  Casali,  and  Pio  had  taught,  and 
to  which  now  others  were  summoned,  among  them  Agostino  Nifo, 
Botticella,  Cristoforo  Aretino,  Chalcondylas,  Parrasio,  and  others. 
Vigerio  and  Tommaso  de  Vio  (Cardinal  of  Gaeta)  also  lectured  on 


_i52i]  The  University  of  Rome  17 

theology,  and  Giovanni  Gozzadini  on  law.  Petrus  Sabinus,  Antonio 
Fabro  of  Amiterno,  and  Raffaelle  Brandolini  are  mentioned  among  the 
lecturers,  and  even  a  Professor  of  Hebrew,  Agacius  Guidocerius,  was 
appointed.  Cardinal  Raffaelle  Riario  acted  as  Chancellor.  The  list  of 
the  professors  given  by  Renazzi  numbers  88  :  11  in  canon  law,  20  in  law, 
15  in  medicine,  and  5  in  philosophy.  It  was  another  merit  of  Leo's  that 
he  established  a  Greek  printing-press,  which  printed  several  books  in 
1517  and  1518.  Chigi  had  some  years  before  set  up  a  Greek  press  in 
his  palace,  from  which  came  the  first  Greek  book  printed  in  Rome,  a 
Pindar,  in  1515.  The  Pope  himself  kept  up  his  interest  in  Greek 
studies,  and  retained  as  custodian  of  his  private  library  one  of  the  best 
judges  of  the  Greek  idiom,  Guarino  di  Favera,  who  published  the  first 
Thesaurus  linguae  Crraecae  in  1496,  and  whom  he  nominated  Bishoj)  of 
Novara. 

Unfortunately  these  excellent  beginnings  were  for  the  most  part  not 
carried  on.  It  was  not  Leo's  fault,  but  his  misfortune,  that  many  of  the 
most  gifted  men  he  had  summoned  were  soon  removed  by  death.  But 
we  cannot  acquit  him  of  having  ceded  Lascaris  like  Leonardo  to  France 
in  1518,  and  allowed  Bembo  to  return  discontented  to  Padua  ;  he  did 
not  secure  jNlarcantonio  Flaminio,  and  held  Sadoleto  at  a  distance  for 
a  very  long  time.  The  continual  dearth  of  money  in  the  papal  treasury 
was  no  doubt  the  chief  cause  of  this  change  of  policy.  Even  before  1517 
the  salaries  of  the  professors  could  not  be  paid,  and  their  number  had 
to  be  diminished.  And  this  was  the  necessary  consequence  of  Leo's 
ridiculous  prodigality  on  his  pleasures  and  his  Court.  Well  might  a  Fra 
Mariano  exclaim  '•^heviamo  al  hahho  santo,  che  ogni  altra  cosa  e  hurla.'''' 
Serious  and  respectable  men  left  him  and  a  pack  of  '•'•  pazzi,  huffoni  e 
simil  sorta  di  piaeevoU"  remained  in  the  Pope's  audience  chambers,  with 
whom  he,  the  Pope  himself,  gamed  and  jested  day  after  day  "atm  risu 
et  hilaritate.''  Such  were  the  people  that  he  now  raised  to  honour  and 
position ;  what  money  he  had  he  spent  for  their  carousals.  No  wonder 
that  this  vermin  flattered  his  vanity  and  sounded  his  praises  as  '■'Leo 
Deus  7ioster."  But  beside  this  we  must  remember,  that,  as  is  universally 
admitted,  Leo  was  extremely  generous  to  the  poor.  The  anonymous 
author  of  the  Vita  Leonis  X,  reprinted  in  Roscoe's  Life,  gives  express 
evidence  as  to  this,  "  egentesjnetate  ac  liheralitate  est  j^rosecutus,'''  and  adds 
that,  according  to  accounts  which  are,  however,  not  very  well  attested,  he 
supported  needy  and  deserving  ecclesiastics  of  other  nationalities.  But 
he  too  remarks,  that  Leo's  chief,  if  not  his  only,  anxiety  was  to  lead  a 
pleasant  and  untroubled  life  ;  in  consequence  of  which  he  spent  his  days 
at  music  and  play,  and  left  the  business  of  government  entirely  in  the 
hands  of  his  cousin  Giulio,  who  was  better  fitted  for  the  task  and  an 
industrious  worker.  Unfortunately  he  admitted  not  only  buffoons  to  his 
games  of  cards,  but  also  corrupt  men  like  Pietro  Aretino,  who  lived  on 
the  Pope's  generosity  as  early  as  1520,  and  in  return  extolled  him  as  the 

C.    M.    H.    II.  2 


18  Defects  of  Leo  as  a  imtron  [i5i3- 

pattern  of  all  pontiffs.  The  appointment  of  the  German  Jew  Giammaria 
as  Castellan  and  Count  of  Verrucchio  was  even  in  Rome  an  unusual 
reward  for  skilled  performance  on  the  lute,  and  even  for  the  third 
successor  of  Alexander  VI  it  was  venturesome  to  let  the  poet  Querno, 
attired  as  Venus  and  supported  by  two  Cupids,  declaim  verses  to  him  at 
the  Cosmalia  in  1519.  We  have  already  mentioned  the  scandalous 
carnival  of  that  year,  and  the  theatre  for  which  Raffaelle  was  forced  to 
paint  the  scenery.  A  year  later  an  unknown  savant,  under  the  mask  of 
Pasquino,  complained  of  the  sad  state  of  the  sciences  in  Rome,  of  the 
exile  of  the  Muses,  and  the  starvation  of  professors  and  literary  men. 

From  all  this  data  the  conclusion  has  been  drawn  that  Leo  X  was  by 
no  means  a  Maecenas  of  the  fine  arts  and  sciences  ;  that  the  high 
enthusiam  for  them  shown  in  his  letters,  as  edited  by  Bembo  and 
Sadoleto,  betrays  more  of  the  thoughts  of  his  clever  secretary  than  his 
own  ideas  ;  and  that  his  literary  dilettantism  was  lacking  in  all  artistic 
perception,  and  all  delicate  cultivation  of  taste.  Leo  has  been  thought 
to  owe  his  undeserved  fame  to  the  circumstance  that  he  was  the  son  of 
Lorenzo,  and  that  his  accession  seemed  at  the  time  destined  to  put  an  end 
to  the  sad  confusions  and  wars  of  the  last  decades.  Moreover,  throughout 
the  long  pontificate  of  Clement  VII,  and  equally  under  the  pressure  of 
the  ecclesiastical  reaction  in  the  time  of  Paul  IV,  no  allusion  was  allowed 
to  the  wrongdoing  of  this  Leonine  period  ;  till  at  last  the  real  circum- 
stances were  so  far  forgotten,  that  the  fine  flower  of  art  and  literature 
in  the  first  twenty  years  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  attributed  to  the 
Medicean  Pope. 

But  there  are  points  to  be  noted  on  the  other  side.  Even  if  we 
discount  much  of  the  praise  which  Poliziano  lavishes  on  his  pupil  in 
deference  to  his  father,  we  cannot  question  the  conspicuous  talent  of 
Giovanni  de'  Medici,  the  exceptionally  careful  literary  education  which 
he  had  enjoyed,  and  his  liberal  and  wise  conduct  during  his  cardinalship. 
We  must  also  esteem  it  to  his  credit  that  as  Pope  he  continued  to  be 
the  friend  of  Raffaelle,  and  that  in  Rome  and  Italy  at  least  he  did  not 
oppress  freedom  of  conscience,  nor  sacrifice  the  free  and  noble  charac- 
ter of  the  best  of  the  Renaissance.  Nor  can  it  be  overlooked  that  his 
pontificate  made  an  excellent  beginning,  though  certainly  the  decline 
soon  set  in  ;  the  Pontiff's  good  qualities  became  less  apparent,  his  faults 
more  conspicuous,  and  events  proved  that,  as  in  so  many  other  instances, 
the  man's  intrinsic  merit  was  not  great  enough  to  bear  his  exaltation  to 
the  highest  dignity  of  Christendom  without  injury  to  his  personality. 

Such  a  change  in  outward  position,  promotion  to  an  absolute  sway 
not  inherited,  intercourse  with  a  host  of  flatterers  and  servants  who 
idolised  him  (there  were  2000  dependents  at  Leo's  Court)  —  all  this 
is  almost  certain  to  be  fatal  to  the  character  of  the  man  to  whose  lot 
it  falls.  Seldom  does  the  possessor  of  the  highest  dignity  find  this 
enormous  burden  a  source  and  means  of  spiritual  illumination   and 


-1522]  Final  estimate  of  Leo  19 

moral  advancement.  Mediocre  natures  soon  develop  an  immovable 
obstinacy,  the  despair  of  any  reasonable  adviser,  and  which  is  none 
the  more  tolerable  for  having  received  the  varnish  of  a  piety  that 
worships  itself.  Talented  natures  too  easily  fall  victims  to  megalomania, 
and  by  extravagant  and  ill-considered  projects  and  undertakings  drag 
their  age  with  them  into  an  abyss  of  ruin.  Weak  and  sensual  natures 
give  themselves  up  to  enjoyment,  and  consider  the  higljest  power  merely 
as  a  licence  to  make  merry.  Leo  was  not  a  coarse  voluptuary  like 
Alexander  VI,  but  he  certainly  was  an  intellectual  Epicurean  such  as 
has  seldom  been  known.  Extremes  should  be  avoided  in  forming 
a  judgment  of  the  pontificate  and  character  of  this  prince.  Not  the 
objective  historian,  but  the  flattering  politician,  spoke  in  Erasmus  when 
he  lauded  the  three  great  benefits  which  Leo  had  conferred  on  humanity: 
the  restoration  of  peace,  of  the  sciences,  and  of  the  fear  of  God.  It  was 
a  groundless  suspicion  that  overshot  the  mark,  when  Martin  Luther 
accused  Leo  of  disbelief  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul  ;  and  John  Bale 
(1574)  spread  abroad  the  supposed  remark  of  the  Pope  to  Bembo  :  "  All 
ages  can  testifye  enough,  how  profitable  that  fable  of  Christ  has  been 
to  us  and  our  compagnie."  Hundreds  of  writers  have  copied  this  from 
Bale  without  verification.  Much  of  Leo's  character  can  be  explained 
by  the  fact  that  he  was  a  true  son  of  the  South,  the  personification  of 
the  soft  Florentine  temperament.  This  accounts  for  his  childish  joy  in 
the  highest  honour  of  Christendom,  "  Questo  vni  da  piacere,  eJie  la  mia 
tiara  !  "  The  words  of  the  ofiice  which  he  was  reading,  when  five  days 
before  his  death  news  was  brought  to  him  of  the  taking  of  Milan  by  his 
troops,  may  well  serve  as  motto  for  this  reign,  lacking  not  sunshine  and 
glory,  but  all  serious  success  and  all  power  :  "  Ut  sine  timore  de  manu 
inimicorum  nostrorum  liherati  se7'viamus  illi.''''  This  pontificate  truly 
was,  as  Gregorovius  has  described  it,  a  revelry  of  culture,  which  Ariosto 
accompanied  with  a  poetic  ohhligato  in  his  many-coloured  Orlando. 
This  poem  was  in  truth  "  the  image  of  Italy  revelling  in  sensual  and 
intellectual  luxury,  the  ravishing,  seductive,  musical,  and  picturesque 
creation  of  decadence,  just  as  Dante's  poem  had  been  the  mirror  of  the 
manly  power  of  the  nation." 

On  December  27,  1521,  a  Conclave  assembled,  which  closed  on 
January  9, 1522,  by  the  election  of  the  Bishop  of  Tortosa  as  Adrian  VI. 
He  was  born  at  Utrecht  in  1459  and  when  a  professor  in  Louvain  was 
chosen  by  the  Emperor  Maximilian  to  be  tutor  to  his  grandson  Charles. 
Afterwards  he  was  sent  as  ambassador  to  Ferdinand  the  Catholic,  who 
bestowed  on  him  the  Bishopric  of  Tortosa  ;  Leo  X  made  him  Cardinal 
in  1517.  This  Conclave,  attended  by  thirty-nine  cardinals,  offered  a 
spectacle  of  the  most  disgraceful  party  struggles,  but  mustered  enough 
unanimity  to  propose  to  the  possible  candidates  a  capitulation,  by  the 
terms  of  which  the  towns  of  the  Papal  States  were  divided  amongst  the 


20  Election  of  Adrian  VI  [1522 

members  of  the  Conclave,  and  hardly  anything  of  the  temporal  power  was 
left  to  the  Pope.  The  Cardinals  de'  Medici  and  Cajetan  (de  Vio)  rescued 
the  assembly  from  this  confusion  of  opinions  and  unruly  passions  by 
proposing  an  absent  candidate.  None  of  the  factions  had  thought  of 
Adrian  Dedel ;  the  astonished  populace  heaped  scorn  and  epigrams  on  the 
Cardinals  and  theirchoice.  Adrian,  who  was  actingas  Charles'  vicegerent 
in  Spain  at  the  time  of  his  election,  could  not  take  up  his  residence  at 
Rome  till  August  29  ;  it  then  looked,  as  Castiglione  says,  like  a  plundered 
abbey  ;  the  Curia  was  ruined  and  poverty-stricken,  half  their  number  had 
fled  before  the  prevailing  pestilence.  The  simple-minded  old  man  had 
brought  his  aged  housekeeper  with  him  from  the  Netherlands  ;  he  was 
contented  with  few  servants  and  spent  but  a  ducat  a  day  for  maintenance. 
He  would  have  preferred  to  live  in  some  simple  villa  with  a  garden  ;  in 
the  Vatican  among  the  remains  of  heathen  antiquity  he  seemed  to  himself 
to  be  rather  a  successor  of  Constantine  than  of  St  Peter.  His  plan  of 
action  included  the  restoration  of  peace  to  Italy  and  Europe,  a  protective 
war  against  the  invading  Turks,  the  reform  of  the  Curia  and  the  Church, 
and  tlie  establishment  of  peace  in  the  German  Church.  Not  one  of  these 
tasks  was  he  able  to  fulfil ;  he  was  destined  only  to  show  his  good  intentions. 
We  shall  deal  presently  with  his  attempts  at  reformation,  which  have 
for  all  time  made  him  worthy  of  admiration  and  his  short  pontificate 
memorable.  He  was  not  lacking  in  good  intentions  to  make  Rome 
once  more  the  centre  of  intellectual  life  ;  but  Reuchlin  had  lately  died  ; 
Erasmus,  to  whom  the  Pope  had  written  on  December  1,  1522,  preferred 
to  remain  in  Germany  ;  Sadoleto  went  to  Carpentras  ;  and  Bembo,  who 
thought  Adrian's  pontificate  even  more  unfortunate  than  Leo's  death, 
stayed  quietly  in  northern  Italy.  Evidently  no  one  had  confidence  in  the 
permanency  of  a  state  of  things  which  could  not  but  appear  abnormal  to 
everybody.  And  indeed,  the  silent,  pedantic  Dutchman,  with  his  cold 
nature,  his  ignorance  of  Italian,  his  handful  of  servants,  "Flemings 
stupid  as  a  stone,"  was  the  greatest  possible  contrast  to  everything  that 
the  refinement  of  Italian  culture  and  the  well-justified  element  of  Latin 
grace  and  charm  demanded  of  a  prince.  The  Italians  would  have  put 
up  for  a  year  or  two  at  least  with  an  austere  and  pious  Pope,  if  his  piety 
had  been  blended  with  something  of  poetry  and  grace ;  but  this  Dutch 
saint  was  utterly  incomprehensible  to  them.  And  in  truth  this  was  not 
entirely  their  fault.  As  Girolamo  Negri  wrote,  one  really  could  apply 
to  him  Cicero's  remark  about  Cato  :  "  he  behaves  as  if  he  had  to  do  with 
Plato's  Republic  instead  of  the  scum  of  the  earth  that  Romulus  collected." 
And  it  must  have  been  unbearable  for  the  Romans  that  the  new  Pope 
should  have  as  little  comprehension  for  all  the  great  art  of  the 
Renaissance  as  for  classical  antiquity.  He  wanted  to  throw  Pasquino 
into  the  Tiber  because  the  jests  pasted  on  the  statue  irritated  him ;  at 
the  sight  of  the  Laocoon  he  turned  away  with  the  words,  "These  are 
heathen  idols."     He  closed  the  Belvedere,  and  even  a  man  like  Nesrri 


1522]  His  character  and  failure  21 

was  seriously  afraid  that  some  clay  the  Pope  woukl  follow  the  supposed 
example  of  Gregorj^  and  have  all  the  heathen  statues  broken  and  used 
as  building  stones  for  St  Peter's. 

In  a  word,  despite  the  best  intentions,  despite  clear  insight,  Adrian 
was  not  adequate  to  his  task.  The  moment  demanded  a  Pope  who  could 
reconcile  and  unite  all  the  great  and  valuable  elements  of  the  Italian 
Renaissance,  the  ripened  fruit  of  the  modern  thought  sprung  from  Dante 
and  Petrarch,  with  the  conceptions  and  conscience  of  the  Germanic  world. 
Both  the  German  professors  who  now  posed  as  leaders  of  Christendom, 
Adrian  Dedel  and  Martin  Luther,  were  lacking  in  the  historic  and 
aesthetic  culture  which  would  have  enabled  them  to  understand  the 
value  of  Roman  civilisation.  Erasmus  saw  further  than  either  of  them, 
but  the  discriminating  critic  lacked  the  unselfish  nobility  of  soul  and  the 
impulse  which  can  only  be  given  by  a  powerful  religious  excitement,  an 
unswerving  conviction,  the  firm  faith  in  a  personal  mission  confided  by 
Providence.  He  too,  despite  his  immense  erudition,  his  deep  insight,  left 
the  world  to  its  own  devices  when  it  required  a  mediator;  for  a  gentle 
and  negative  criticism  of  liuman  folly  is,  taken  by  itself,  of  little  value. 
Adrian  could  neither  gain  the  mastery  over  Luther's  Reformation, 
nor  succeed  in  reforming  even  the  Roman  Curia,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
whole  Church.  The  luxurious  Cardinals  went  on  with  their  pleasant 
life ;  when  he  came  to  die  they  demanded  his  money  and  treated  him, 
as  the  Duke  of  Sessa  expressed  it,  like  a  criminal  on  the  rack.  The 
threat  of  war  between  France  and  the  German  Empire  lay  all  the  while 
like  an  incubus  on  his  pontificate.  With  heavy  heart  the  most  peace- 
loving  of  all  the  Popes,  reminded  by  Francis  I  of  the  days  of  Philip  the 
Fair,  was  at  last  obliged  to  enter  into  a  treaty  with  England  and 
Germany.  Adrian  survived  to  see  war  break  out  in  Lombardy  ;  he  died 
on  the  day  when  the  French  crossed  the  Ticino,  September  14,  1523. 
Giovio  and  Guicciardini  relate  that  some  wag  wrote  on  the  door  of  his 
physician,  "  To  the  deliverer  of  the  Fatherland,  from  the  senate  and 
people  of  Rome."  Little  as  the  people  were  delighted  with  the  pontifi- 
cate of  this  last  German  Pope,  he  was  no  better  pleased  with  it  himself. 
He  spoke  of  his  throne  as  the  chair  of  misery,  and  said  in  his  first 
epitaph,  that  it  was  his  greatest  misfortune  to  have  attained  to  power. 
The  epitaph  written  for  his  tomb  in  Santa  Maria  dell'  Anima  by  his 
faithful  servant,  the  Datary  and  Cardinal  Enckenvoert,  was  certainly 
the  best  motto  for  this  man  and  his  pontificate :  "  Proh  dolor  !  quantum 
refert  in  quae  temporavel  optimi  cuiusque  virtus  incidat.''^ 

A  Conclave  of  thirty-three  electors  assembled  on  the  first  of  October, 
1523.  Some  sided  with  the  Emperor,  some  with  the  French,  but  the 
imperial  party  was  also  divided.  Pompeo  Colonna  made  an  enemy  of 
the  future  Pope  by  opposing  his  candidature,  and  Cardinal  Alessandro 
Farnese  in  vain  offered  the  ambassadors  of  both  sides  200,000  ducats. 


22  Election  of  Clement  VII  [1523 

Cardinal  Wolsey  once  again  made  all  kinds  of  offers,  but  there  was  now 
a  feeling  against  all  foreigners.  During  the  night  of  the  18th-19th  of 
November  Giulio  de'  Medici  was  elected.  He  was  the  son  of  Giuliano, 
who  fell  in  the  Pazzi  conspiracy.  A  certain  Fioretta,  daughter  of 
Antonia,  is  mentioned  as  his  mother ;  little  or  nothing  was  known  in 
Florence  about  her  and  her  child.  Lorenzo  took  the  orphan  into 
his  house  and  had  him  brought  up  with  his  sons.  In  1494  Giulio, 
then  sixteen  years  of  age,  followed  them  into  exile.  Living  for  some 
time  in  Lombardy,  but  mostly  with  Giovanni,  on  his  cousin's  rise  in 
power  he  too  was  quickly  promoted.  Leo  nominated  him  Archbishop  of 
Florence,  having  specially  dispensed  him  from  the  canonical  hindrance 
of  his  illegitimate  birth.  At  his  very  first  creation  of  Cardinals  on 
September  23,  1513,  tlie  Pope  bestowed  on  him  the  title  of  Cardinal  of 
Santa  Maria  in  Dominica  and  made  him  Legate  of  Bologna,  witnesses- 
having  first  sworn  to  the  virtual  marriage  of  his  father  Giuliano  with 
Fioretta.  During  Leo's  reign,  as  we  have  already  seen.  Cardinal  Giulio 
had  almost  all  the  business  of  government  in  his  own  hands.  He  secured 
the  election  of  Adrian,  but  left  Rome  and  the  Pope  on  October  13, 1522, 
in  the  company  of  Manuel,  the  imperial  envoy,  in  order  to  retire  to 
Florence.  A  difference  with  Francesco  Soderini  brought  him  back  in 
the  following  April  to  the  Eternal  City.  He  entered  it  with  two  thousand 
horse,  and  already  greeted  as  the  future  Pope  kept  great  state  in  his 
palace.  A  few  days  later  Francesco  Soderini,  accused  of  high  treason, 
disappeared  into  the  Castle  of  St  Angelo ;  he  was  released  during  the 
next  Council.  With  the  new  reign  a  return  of  happier  times  was 
expected  —  una  Corte  fiorida  e  un  huon  Pontefice ;  the  restoration  of 
literature,  fled  before  the  barbarians  ;  "  est  enim  Mediceae  familiae 
decus  favere  3Iusis."  And  indeed  many  things  seemed  to  point  to  a 
fortunate  pontificate.  The  new  Pope  was  resjjected  and  rich,  and  now 
of  a  staid  and  sober  life.  He  had  ruled  Rome  well  in  Leo's  day,  and 
as  Archbishop  of  Florence  had  used  his  power  successfully.  He  was 
cautious,  economical,  but  not  avaricious  ;  though  not  an  author  himself, 
an  admirer  of  art  and  science  ;  a  lover  of  beautiful  buildings,  as  his 
Villa  Madama  gave  proof,  and  free  from  his  cousin's  unfortunate  liking 
for  the  company  of  worthless  buffoons.  He  did  not  hunt,  but  he  was 
fond  of  good  instrumental  music,  and  liked  to  amuse  himself  at  table 
with  the  conversation  of  learned  men. 

Very  soon  it  became  clear  that  Clement  VII  was  one  of  those  men, 
who,  though  excellent  in  a  subordinate  position,  prove  unsatisfactory 
when  placed  at  the  head.  The  characters  of  both  Medici  Popes  are 
wonderfully  conceived  in  Raffaelle's  portraits  :  in  Leo's  otherwise  intel- 
lectual face  there  is  a  vulgarity  that  almost  degenerates  into  coarseness 
and  sensuality,  and  with  Clement  the  cold  soul,  lacking  all  strong  feeling, 
distrustful,  never  unfolding  itself.  "  In  spite  of  all  his  talents,"  said 
Francesco  Vettori,  "  he  brought  the  greatest  misery  on  Rome  and  on 


1523-6]  Clement  VII  and  his  counsellors  23 

himself  ;  he  lost  courage  at  once  and  let  go  the  rudder."  Guicciardini 
too  complains  of  Giulio's  faintheartedness,  vacillation,  and  indecision  as 
the  chief  source  of  his  misfortune.  This  indecision  kept  him  wavering 
between  the  counsels  of  the  two  men,  in  whom  from  the  beginning  of  his 
reign  he  placed  his  confidence  ;  one  belonging  to  the  French  faction, 
the  other  to  that  of  the  Emperor.  One  was  like  himself  a  bastard, 
Giammatteo  Giberti,  rightly  valued  by  all  his  contemporaries  for  his 
piety,  honesty,  and  insight.  He  took  an  active  part  in  the  foundation 
of  the  Order  of  the  Theatines  (1524)  by  the  pious  Gaetano  da  Thiene, 
afterwards  canonised,  in  company  with  Caraffa.  He  was  appointed  Da- 
tary  by  Clement,  and  afterwards  Bishop  of  Verona.  Gaspare  Contarini, 
writing  in  1530,  says  that  he  was  on  more  intimate  terms  with  the  Pope 
than  were  any  of  his  other  counsellors,  and  that  in  politics  he  worked  in 
the  French  interest.  He  left  the  Court  in  1527  to  retire  to  his  bishopric, 
which  he  made  a  model  of  good  government.  In  Verona  he  founded 
a  learned  society  and  a  Greek  printing-press,  which  published  good 
editions  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church.  Paul  III  summoned  him  to 
Rome  several  times  ;  it  was  on  his  way  back  that  he  died  in  1543.  The 
Emperor's  interests  were  represented  by  Clement's  other  counsellor, 
Nikolaus  von  Schomberg,  of  Meissen,  in  Saxony.  On  the  occasion  of 
a  journey  to  Italy  in  1497,  carried  away  by  the  preaching  of  Savonarola 
in  Pisa,  he  had  joined  the  same  monastery.  Later,  scorned  by  the 
populace  as  a  Judas,  he  had  gone  over  to  the  party  of  the  Medici,  was 
summoned  to  Rome  as  Professor  of  Theology  by  Leo  X,  created  Arch- 
bishop of  Capua  in  1520,  and  often  entrusted  with  diplomatic  missions, 
in  which  capacity  Giulio  came  to  know  and  value  him.  Contarini  speaks 
well  of  him,  but  evidently  only  half  trusted  him.  Schomberg  received 
the  Cardinal's  hat  from  Paul  III  in  1534,  and  died  in  1537. 

Clement's  accession  had  at  once  brought  about  a  political  change  in 
favour  of  France.  The  Pope's  policy  wavered  long  between  the  King 
and  the  Emperor  ;  weak  towards  both  of  them,  undecided,  and  on 
occasion  faithless  enough.  On  January  5,  1525,  he  himself  announced 
to  the  Emperor  the  conclusion  of  his  treaty  with  Francis  I.  The 
Battle  of  Pavia,  the  greatest  military  event  of  the  sixteenth  century 
(February  24,  1525),  made  Charles  V  master  of  Italy  and  Francis  I  his 
prisoner.  By  April  I  Clement  had  made  his  peace  with  the  Emperor, 
but  soon  began  to  intrigue  and  tried  to  form  a  league  against  him  with 
Venice,  Savoy,  Ferrara,  Scotland,  Hungary,  Portugal,  and  other  States  ; 
this  was  mainly  the  work  of  Giberti.  At  this  time  the  bold  plan  of 
a  League  of  Freedom,  which  was  to  claim  the  independence  of  Italy  from 
foreign  Powers,  was  formed  by  Girolamo  Morone  ;  Pescara,  the  husband 
of  Vittoria  Colonna,  the  real  victor  at  Pavia,  was  to  stand  at  its 
head.  The  conspiracy  in  which  Clement  on  his  own  confession  (see  his 
letter  to  Charles  V  of  June  23,  1526)  had  taken  part,  was  betrayed  by 
Pescara  himself  ;    at  his  instigation  Morone  named  the    Pope  as  the 


24  Clement  VII  and  Italian  politics  [1525-9 

originator  of  the  offers  made  to  Pescara.  The  veil  of  secrecy  still  covers 
both  Pescara's  action  —  Guicciardini  characterised  it  as  eterna  infamia  — 
and  his  early  death,  which  occurred  on  March  30,  1525.  The  Emperor 
freely  expressed  his  opinion  of  the  Pope's  faithlessness  (September  17, 
1526).  On  May  22,  1526,  Clement  concluded  the  Holy  League  of 
Cognac  with  Francis,  who  had  returned  to  France  at  the  beginning  of 
March,  his  captivity  over.  This  brought  on  open  war  with  the  Emperor, 
the  attack  on  Rome  by  the  Colonna  (September  20),  the  plundering  of 
the  Borgo,  the  march  of  the  Imperial  troops  against  Rome  under  the 
command  of  Bourbon,  the  storming  of  the  part  of  the  city  named  after 
Leo  in  which  Bourbon  fell  (May  6,  1527),  the  flight  of  the  Pope  to 
the  Castle  of  St  Angelo,  and  finally  the  storming  of  Rome  and  the  sack 
which  followed  it ;  cruel  and  revolting  to  all  Christian  feeling,  it  remains 
to  this  day  a  memory  of  terror  for  all  Italians.  No  Guiscard  appeared 
this  time,  as  in  the  days  of  Gregory  VII,  to  save  the  beleaguered  Pope. 
On  June  5,  1527,  he  was  forced  to  capitulate,  yield  the  fortress  and  give 
himself  up  to  the  mercy  of  the  Emperor.  When  a  prisoner  and  deprived 
of  all  his  means,  Clement  bade  Cellini  melt  down  his  tiara,  a  symbol  of 
his  own  position  ;  for  the  whole  temporal  power  of  the  Papacy  lay  at  the 
feet  of  the  Emperor,  who  could  abolish  it  if  he  chose.  We  know  that 
this  policy  was  suggested  to  him  :  we  know  also  that  Charles  had  serious 
thoughts  of  utilising  the  position  of  the  Pope  for  an  ecclesiastical  refor- 
mation, and  forcing  him  to  summon  the  General  Council,  which  all  sides 
demanded.  But  France  and  England  declared  they  would  recognise  no 
Council  until  the  Pope  was  set  free  again,  and  the  Spanish  clergy  also 
petitioned  for  the  release  of  the  Head  of  the  Church.  Once  more  the 
Imperial  troops  returned  to  Rome  from  their  summer  quarters,  and  in 
September,  1527,  the  city  was  once  more  sacked.  Veyre  arrived  as  the 
Emperor's  agent  to  offer  Clement  freedom  on  condition  of  neutralit}^, 
a  general  peace,  and  the  promotion  of  reform  by  means  of  a  Council. 
The  agreement  was  signed  on  November  26  ;  but  on  December  8  the 
Pope  escaped  to  Orvieto,  whence  on  June  1,  1528,  he  removed  to  Viterbo. 
The  war  proved  disastrous  for  France  ;  Lautrec's  defeats,  his  death  by 
plague  (August  15),  the  terrible  state  of  Italy,  which  was  now  but  one 
vast  battlefield  strewn  with  corpses,  induced  Clement  at  last  to  side  with 
the  Emperor.  On  October  8,  1528,  he  returned  horror-stricken  to  half- 
burnt,  starving  Rome.  Harried  by  the  plague,  her  population  diminished 
by  one-half  ;  her  importance  for  the  literary  and  artistic  life  of  humanity 
had  been  for  ever  marred  by  the  awful  events  of  the  year  1527.  Those 
of  her  artists  and  learned  men  who  had  not  fled  were  maltreated  and 
robbed  during  the  Sack  :  those  that  were  left  were  beggars  and  had  to 
seek  their  bread  elsewhere.  Erasmus  wrote  to  Sadoleto  (October  1, 
1528)  that  not  the  city,  but  the  world  had  perished,  and  that  the 
present  sufferings  of  Rome  were  more  cruel  than  those  brought  on  her 
by  the  Goths  and  the  Gauls.     From  Carpentras  in  1529  Sadoleto  wrote 


1529-32]      Clement  VII  and  the  Emperor  Charles  V         25 

a  mournful  letter  to  Colocci,  in  which  he  speaks  of  past  glories  —  a  letter 
aptly  called  by  Gregorovius  the  swan's  song,  the  farewell  to  the  cheerful 
world  of  humanist  times. 

Clement's  participation  in  the  league  against  Charles  and  the  Empire 
had  favoured  the  spread  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  in  Germany. 
Unwittingly  the  Pope  had  become  Luther's  best  ally  at  the  very 
moment  when  for  Catholicism  everything  depended  on  strengthening 
the  Emperor's  opposition  to  the  Reformation,  which  had  the  hour  in  its 
favour.  Even  after  the  Sack  the  Pope  was  not  chiefly  concerned  for  the 
preservation  and  improvement  of  the  Church,  or  for  the  reparation  of 
the  evil  done  to  Rome.  What  absorbed  his  attention  were  the  dynastic 
interests  of  his  own  House,  which  had  once  more  been  expelled  from 
Florence,  and  the  restoration  of  the  Papal  State.  The  Emperor  could  have 
ended  the  Temporal  Power  with  a  stroke  of  the  pen  had  he  not  feared  the 
immense  influence  of  the  clergy  and  the  threatening  voice  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion, which  did  not  hesitate  to  cross  the  threshold  even  of  the  most  mighty. 
Charles  needed  the  Pope,  since  a  lasting  enmity  with  him  would  have 
cut  the  ground  from  under  his  feet  both  in  Spain  and  Germany.  He 
needed  him  in  order  to  keep  his  hold  on  Italy,  and  by  his  influence  to 
divide  the  League.  And  so  the  Treaty  of  Barcelona  was  brought  about 
(June  29,  1529),  whereby  the  Emperor  acknowledged  the  power  of 
Sforza  in  Milan,  gave  the  Papal  State  back  to  the  Pope,  undertook  to 
restore  Florence  to  the  Medici  by  force  of  arms,  and  as  a  pledge  of 
friendship  to  give  his  illegitimate  daughter  Margaret  to  Alessandro  de' 
Medici.  The  Imperial  coronation  was  moreover  to  take  place  in  Italy. 
The  "  Ladies'  Peace  "  of  Cambray  (August  5,  1529)  confirmed  Span- 
ish rule  in  Italy.  Clement  crowned  Charles  Emperor  on  February  24, 
1530,  in  Bologna,  having  come  thither  with  sixteen  Cardinals.  The 
Emperor  left  for  the  diet  at  Augsburg  on  June  15.  The  Pope  returned 
to  Rome  on  April  9  ;  and  on  August  12  Florence  fell  after  a  heroic 
death-struggle,  burying  the  honour  of  the  Pope  in  its  fall,  since  he  had 
not  hesitated  to  hand  over  the  freedom  of  his  native  town  to  his  family. 
The  republican  constitution  of  the  town  was  formally  annulled  on  April 
27,  1532,  and  Alessandro  de'  Medici  was  proclaimed  Duke  of  Florence. 

Clement  VII  is  said  to  have  sighed  during  the  siege  :  "  Oh  that 
Florence  had  never  existed !  "  The  Papacy  itself,  as  well  as  its  repre- 
sentative in  that  time,  had  good  reason  to  utter  this  cry ;  for  the  fall  of 
the  Republic  brought  about  by  the  Pope  and  accomplished  by  the 
Emperor  and  his  bands  of  foreign  mercenaries,  joined  the  Papacy  hence- 
forth to  all  movements  inimical  to  the  freedom  and  unity  of  Italy.  It 
delivered  over  Italy  and  the  Church  to  the  idea  of  an  ecclesiastico-political 
despotism  native  to  Spain  ;  it  severed  the  bond  which  in  the  Middle 
Ages  had  kept  Rome  in  touch  with  the  national  aims  of  the  Italian 
people.  In  December,  1532,  Emperor  and  Pope  met  once  more  in 
Bologna  in  order  to  conclude  an  Italian  league.     At  the  same  moment 


26  Marriage  of  Catharine  de^  Medici  [1532-3 

Clement  was  negotiating  with  France,  who  did  her  utmost  to  draw  the 
Papacy  from  the  embrace  of  Spain.  Francis  I  proposed  the  marriage  of 
his  second  son  Henry  with  Catharine,  daughter  of  Lorenzo  de'  Medici 
the  younger,  and  did  his  very  best  to  help  Clement  to  prevent  an 
assemblage  of  the  Council,  as  we  now  know  from  the  disclosures  of 
Antonio  Soriano.  The  marriage  of  Catharine  de'  Medici,  through 
whom  her  House  attained  to  royal  honour,  was  celebrated  with  great 
solemnity  at  Marseilles  in  October,  1533.  Clement  himself  had  come  to 
witness  ther  triumph  of  his  family  in  the  person  of  his  great-niece.  The 
young  girl,  scarcely  more  than  a  child,  whom  he  handed  over  to  the 
royal  House  of  France,  proved  a  terrible  gift  to  the  land ;  for  some 
thirty-eight  years  later  she  contrived  the  Massacre  of  St  Bartholomew. 
The  jewels  which  Filippo  Strozzi  counted  over  to  the  French  as  forming 
part  of  the  dowry  of  the  little  princess,  —  Genoa,  Milan,  Naples,  —  never 
came  into  the  possession  of  France,  and  Henry  was  forced  in  the  Treaty 
of  Cateau-Cambresis  to  yield  all  the  gains  of  the  French  policy  of 
annexation  in  Italy. 

Clement  was  back  in  Rome  by  December  10,  1538,  and  in  the 
following  March  annulled  Thomas  Cranmer's  declaration  that  the 
marriage  of  Henry  VIII  with  his  cousin  Catharine  of  Aragon  was  void. 
The  Pope  threatened  the  King  with  excommunication  if  he  did  not 
re-establish  the  marriage.  The  King's  answer  was  the  separation  of 
England  from  the  obedience  of  Rome.  Shortly  before  this  the  articles  of 
the  League  of  Schmalkalden  had  recorded  the  desertion  of  a  consider- 
able part  of  South  Germany  to  the  Reformation.  The  Council  which 
was  to  have  restored  unity  to  the  Church  had  not  come  into  being. 
Clement  certainly  raised  hopes  of  it  in  the  near  future  at  Bologna 
(January  10, 1533),  but  only  for  the  sake  of  appearances.  In  reality  he 
had  every  reason  to  prevent  all  discussion  by  a  Council  of  his  personal 
and  d3mastic  policy,  and  he  attained  his  end  by  excuses  and  means 
which  led  the  Emperor's  confessor,  Cardinal  Garcia  de  Loaysa  (Ma}^ 
1530),  to  write  to  Charles  V  that  this  Pope  was  the  most  mysterious  of 
beings,  that  he  knew  more  ciphers  than  anyone  else  on  earth,  and  that 
he  would  not  hear  of  a  Council  at  any  price. 

Even  the  last  act  of  the  dying  Pope  leaves  a  painful  impression. 
On  September  28,  1534,  he  wrote  a  long  letter  to  the  Emperor,  to 
recommend  to  his  care,  not  the  welfare  of  the  Church  or  of  Italy,  but 
the  preservation  of  the  rule  of  the  Medici  in  Florence,  and  the  protection 
of  his  two  beloved  nephews,  the  Cardinal  Ippolito  and  Alessandro,  whom 
Clement  had  appointed  to  be  his  heirs. 

After  a  painful  illness  Clement  VII  died  on  September  25,  1534. 
His  friend  Francesco  Vettori  gives  testimony  that  for  a  century  no 
better  man  had  occupied  Peter's  Chair  than  Clement,  who  was  neither 
cruel  nor  proud,  neither  venal,  nor  avaricious,  nor  luxurious.  And 
despite  of  this,  he  continues,  the  catastrophe  came  in  his  time,  while 


Decadence  of  Italy  27 


others  stained  with  crime  lived  and  died  happily.  And  indeed  many 
an  excellent  quality  seemed  to  promise  this  Medici  a  happier  reign  ; 
but  he  had  to  atone  for  his  dynastic  egotism  and  for  the  sins  of  his 
predecessors.  A  fatal  confusion  of  politics  and  religion  bore  its  bitterest 
fruits  in  his  pontificate.  Rome  was  ruined,  Italy  from  Milan  to  Naples 
was  turned  into  a  field  of  slaughter  bathed  in  blood  and  tears  ;  the 
unity  of  the  Church  was  destroyed,  and  half  Europe  fell  away  from 
the  centre  of  Christianity.  All  this  was  a  painful  commentary  on  the 
theories  of  political  Catholicism  and  the  esteem  of  that  temporal  sway 
over  the  world  which  some  still  affirm  to  be  useful  or  even  necessary  to 
the  cause  of  Christ. 

The  harmonious  union  of  medieval  with  modern  thought,  the  organic 
arrangement  of  the  ideas  brought  by  the  Renaissance  in  the  system  of 
Christian  Ethics,  the  inner  development  of  Catholicism  on  the  basis  of 
this  harmony  as  planned  in  the  scheme  of  the  Camera  della  Segnatura ; 
all  this  miscarried,  and  was  bound  to  do  so,  since  the  acting  powers,  on 
whom  devolved  the  accomplishment  of  this  great  scheme,  conceived  in 
the  true  spirit  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  lacked  the  ability  and  enthusiasm 
necessary  for  the  execution  of  so  enormous  a  task.  The  preceding 
paragraphs  have  shown  to  what  extent  these  acting  powers  were  in- 
capable of  fulfilling  the  mission  set  before  them. 

The  powers  at  work  were  two  in  chief,  the  Papacy  and  the  Italian 
nation.  We  have  seen  the  Papacy  of  Medicean  Rome  swayed  by 
political,  by  worldly  considerations,  guided  in  all  its  actions  and  de- 
cisions by  the  dynastic  interests  of  its  rulers.  The  religious  and  moral 
point  of  view  was  ignored  in  this  domain  of  worldly  aims  and  ideas. 
The  pontificate  of  Adrian  VI,  that  came  as  an  interlude  between  those 
of  Leo  X  and  Clement  VII,  certainly  was  representative  of  religious 
Catholicism,  —  honourable,  wise,  sincere.  But  on  the  one  liand  it  was 
of  too  short  a  duration  to  ripen  any  of  its  fruits,  and  on  the  other  it 
failed,  not  only  because  of  Italian  corruption,  and  the  general  dislike  to 
foreigners,  but  also  because  the  last  Teutonic  Pope  could  not  comprehend 
the  development  of  Italian  culture,  the  right  of  the  Latin  world  to  its 
own  characteristics,  and  the  aesthetic  interests  swaying  all  minds  south 
of  the  Alps.  The  predominance  of  the  worldly  and  sensuous  elements 
in  life,  in  science,  and  even  in  art  came  into  play ;  they  did  their  part 
in  preventing  the  victory  of  idealistic  views. 

Although  the  Curia  was  not  equal  to  its  task,  had  Italy  been  still  in 
a  healthy  state  the  nation  and  public  opinion  could  have  forced  the 
Papacy  into  right  courses.  But  here  also  corruption  had  long  since  set 
in.  Strong  moral  force,  such  as  proclaims  itself  in  Dante,  in  Caterina 
of  Siena,  was  gone  from  the  x^eople  ;  they  had  but  lately  given  its  last 
prophet  to  the  flames  in  the  Piazza  della  Signoria  at  Florence.  No 
nation  can  sin  thus  against  its  best  men  without  punishment.      The 


28  The  Medici  and  reform 

people  of  Italy  could  not  put  new  blood  and  fresh  life  into  the  Curia, 
because  in  them  the  law  of  the  body  had  triumphed  over  the  law  of  the 
spirit.  The  same  observation  has  to  be  made  in  the  province  of  literature. 
We  have  spoken  of  Ariosto  ;  the  other  productions  of  the  Medicean 
period  in  the  domain  of  literature  are  for  the  most  part  trifling  and 
frivolous  in  their  contents.  As  Gregorovius  says,  their  poets  sang  the 
praises  of  Maecenas  and  Phryne,  they  wrote  pastorals  and  epics  of 
chivalry,  while  the  freedom  of  Italy  perished.  The  theatre,  still  more 
early  and  markedly  than  pictorial  art,  cut  itself  adrift  from  ecclesiastical 
subjects  and  from  the  whole  world  of  religious  ideas.  It  became  not 
merely  worldly,  but  distinctly  pagan,  and  at  the  same  time  incapable 
of  any  great  creation  of  lasting  value  which  could  touch  the  heart  of 
the  nation.  Serious  theological  literature  was  almost  entirely  lacking 
at  Leo's  Court  and  during  his  pontificate,  with  the  exception  of  two  or 
three  names,  such  as  Sadoleto,  Egidio  of  Viterbo,  and  Tommaso  de  Vio. 
After  the  death  of  Raffaelle  and  Leonardo  painting  and  sculpture  at 
once  took  a  downward  path.  ]\Iichelangelo  upheld  for  himself  the  great 
traditions  of  the  best  time  of  the  Renaissance  for  almost  another  quarter 
of  a  century  ;  but  he  was  soon  a  very  lonely  man.  Decadence  showed 
itself  directly  after  Raffaelle's  death,  when  INIarcantonio  engraved  Giulio 
Romano's  indecent  pictures,  and  Pietro  Aretino  wrote  a  commentar}^  on 
them  of  still  more  indecent  sonnets.  Clement  VII,  who  had  at  one  time 
received  this  most  worthless  of  all  men  of  letters  as  a  guest  in  his  Villa 
Careggi,  repulsed  him  after  this.  But  Aretino  was  characteristic  of  his 
time  ;  what  other  would  have  borne  with  him  ? 

After  Raffaelle's  death  ideas  were  no  longer  made  the  subject  of 
paintings  ;  the  world  of  enjoyment,  sweet,  earthly,  sensual  enjoyment, 
was  now  depicted  before  art  declined  into  a  chilly  mannerism  and  the 
composite  falseness  of  eclecticism.  A  time  which  is  no  longer  able  to 
give  an  artistic  rendering  of  ideas  is  incapable  of  resolution  and  of  great 
actions.  Not  only  the  Muses  and  the  Graces  wept  by  Raffaelle's  grave, 
the  whole  Julian  epoch  was  buried  with  him.  During  Leo's  reign  he 
had  undertaken  with  feverish  activity  to  conjure  up  not  only  ancient 
Rome  but  the  antique  ideals.  In  vain.  His  unaided  force  was  not 
enough  for  the  task,  and  he  saw  himself  deserted  by  those  whom  he 
most  needed  and  on  whom  he  relied.  And  then  came  the  Sack  of 
Rome  ;  it  was  the  tomb  of  all  this  ideal  world  of  the  Renaissance 
period.  From  the  smoking  ruins  of  the  Eternal  City  rose  a  dense, 
grey  fog,  a  gloomy,  spiritless  despotism,  utterl}^  out  of  touch  with  the 
joyous  spring  of  the  mind  of  the  Italian  people  whose  harbinger  was 
Dante.  Under  its  oppression  the  intellectual  life  of  the  nation  soon 
sank  asphyxiated. 

The  Guelf  movement  of  the  Middle  Ages,  which  had  its  home 
in  the  free  States  of  Tuscany  and  North  Italy,  was  dead  and  gone  ; 
it  could  no  longer  give  life  or  withhold  it.     And  the  old  Ghibelline 


1510-1]  The  Council  of  Pisa  29 

principle  was  dead  too.  No  German  Emperor  arose  in  whom  the 
dreams  of  Henry  VII  could  live  again.  What  Charles  V  sought  and 
attained  in  the  two  conferences  at  Bologna  and  during  his  subsequent 
visit  to  Rome  (April  5,  1536)  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the 
plans  of  the  Emperors  before  him.  The  restoration  of  the  Medici  in 
Florence  and  the  Emperor's  dealings  with  the  doomed  Republic  in- 
augurated that  unhappy  policy  which  down  to  1866  continued  to 
make  the  Germans  enemies  of  the  Italians.  This  it  was  that,  after  the 
tribulations  of  Metternich's  government,  brought  on  the  catastrophe  of 
Solferino  and  Sadowa. 

The  programme  of  1510  demanded  in  the  first  place  a  reformation 
of  the  Church,  both  in  its  head  and  its  members.  Let  us  consider  the 
attitude  of  Rome  under  the  Medici  with  regard  to  this  question. 

The  reformations  attempted  by  the  Councils  of  Constance  and  Basel 
had  utterly  failed.  Since  Martin  V  had  returned  to  Rome  the  Papacy 
could  consider  nothing  beyond  the  governing  of  the  Papal  State,  and 
since  Calixtus  III  it  was  involved  in  d^v^nastic  intrigue.  Aeneas  Silvius 
had  stated  with  the  utmost  clearness  thirteen  years  before  he  became 
Pope  that  no  one  in  the  Curia  any  longer  thought  of  reformation.  Then 
Savonarola  appeared ;  France  and  Germany  cried  out  for  reform.  At 
the  synods  of  Orleans  and  Tours  (1510)  the  French  decided  on  the 
assembling  of  an  Ecumenical  Council.  In  view  of  the  decree  Frequens 
of  the  Council  of  Constance,  the  dilatoriness  of  the  Pope,  and  the 
breaking  of  the  oath  he  had  sworn  in  conclave,  the  Second  Synod  of 
Pisa  was  convoked  (May  16,  1511).  It  was  first  and  foremost  a  check 
offered  to  Julius  II  by  French  politicians,  but  was  also  intended  to 
obtain  a  general  recognition  by  the  Church  of  the  principles  of  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction  of  1438  drawn  from  the  articles  of  the  Basel  and 
Constance  conventions.  This  pseudo-synod  was  attended  only  by  a  few 
French  prelates  and  savants.  Meantime  the  Emperor  Maximilian  had 
conferred  Avith  the  leading  theologians  of  his  Empire,  such  as  Geiler  von 
Kaisersberg,  Wimpheling,  Trithemius,  Johann  Eck,  Matthaus  Lang, 
and  Conrad  Peutinger,  about  the  state  of  the  Church.  In  1510  he 
commissioned  the  Schlettstadt  professor,  Jakob  Wimpheling,  to  draw  up 
a  plan  of  reform,  which  the  latter  published  in  his  Gravamina  Germanicae 
Nationis  cum  remediis  et  avisamentis  ad  Caesaream  Maiestatem.  It  is 
composed  of  an  extract  from  the  Pragmatic  Sanction,  an  essay  on  the 
machinations  of  courtiers,  another  on  the  ten  grievances,  with  their 
remedies,  notifications  for  the  Emperor,  and  an  excursus  concerning 
legates.  The  ten  gravamina  are  the  same  which  Martin  Mayr  had 
mentioned  as  early  as  1457  in  his  epistle  to  Aeneas  Silvius. 

The  Emperor,  who  since  1507  cherished  the  wild  plan  of  procuring 
his  own  election  to  the  Papacy  on  the  death  of  Julius,  at  first  gave 
his  protection  to  the  Council  of  Pisa.     Afterwards  he  withdrew  it,  and 


30  The  Fifth  Lateran  Council  [1513-7 

the  German  Bishops  also  refused  to  have  anything  to  do  witli  the 
schismatic  tendencies  of  the  French.  On  July  18,  1511,  Julius  II 
summoned  an  Ecumenical  Council  to  Rome ;  it  assembled  there  on 
April  19, 1512,  with  a  very  small  attendance  composed  entirely  of  Italian 
prelates.  The  Spaniards  also  showed  an  interest  in  the  work  of  reforma- 
tion, as  is  proved  by  the  noteworthy  anonymous  Brevis  Memoria^ 
published  by  Bollinger  ;  but  they  took  no  part  in  the  Council.  Before 
the  opening  of  the  Lateranense  Va  controversy  had  arisen  on  the  powers 
within  the  scope  of  Councils.  The  Milanese  jurist  Decius  had  upheld 
the  side  of  the  Pisan  Council,  so  had  the  anonymous  author  of  the 
Status  Romani  Imperii,  published  in  Nardouin,  and  Zaccaria  Ferreni  of 
Vicenza ;  the  chief  disputant  on  the  side  of  the  Curia  was  Tommaso  de 
Vio  (Cajetan). 

It  was  a  good  omen  for  the  Council  that  the  best  and  most  pious 
man  of  intellect  then  in  Rome  made  the  opening  speech.  Aegidius  of 
Viterbo  as  Principal  of  the  Augustinian  Order  had  worked  energetically 
at  the  reform  of  his  own  Order  ever  since  1508.  Bembo  and  Sadoleto 
praised  his  intellect  and  his  learning,  and  the  latter  wrote  to  the  former 
that,  though  humanity  and  the  artes  humanitatis  had  been  lost  to  man- 
kind, yet  Aegidius  alone  and  unaided  could  have  restored  them  to  us.' 
In  his  opening  speech  Aegidius  uttered  some  earnest  truths  and  deep 
thoughts.  He  touched  on  the  real  source  of  decadence  in  the  Church, 
when,  perhaps  in  allusion  to  Dante's  words  about  the  donation  of 
Constantine,  he  said,  "  Ita  ferme  post  Constantmi  tempora,  quae  ut  sacris 
in  rebus  multuni  adiecere  splendoris  et  ornamefiti,  ita  morum  et  vitae 
severitatem  non  parum  enervanmt ;  quoties  a  Synodis  liahendis  cessatum 
est,  toties  vidimus  sponsam  a  sjjonso  derelictam.''' 

Unfortunately  the  Council  did  not  fulfil  the  expectations  which  might 
have  been  based  on  this  inaugural  address.  When  Leo  X  opened  the 
sixth  sitting  (April  27, 1513)  the  assembly  numbered, besides  22  cardinals 
and  91  abbots,  only  62  bishops.  Bishop  Simon,  of  Modena,"  appealed  to 
the  prelates  to  begin  by  reforming  themselves.  At  the  seventh  sitting 
the  preacher,  Rio,  revived  the  theory  of  the  two  swords.  On  December  19, 
1513,  France  was  officially  represented,  and  at  the  eighth  sitting  the 
Council  condemned  the  heresies  taken  from  the  Arabs  concerning  the 
human  soul,  which  was  explained  as  humani  corporis  forma.  These  had 
already  been  denounced  at  Vienne.  Then  the  theologians  were  called  on 
to  prune  "the  infected  roots  of  philosophy  and  poetry."  Philosophers 
were  to  uphold  the  truth  of  Christianity.  Bishop  Nicholas  of  Bergamo 
and  Cardinal  Cajetan  opposed  this  measure ;  the  first  did  not  wish 
restrictions  to  be  imposed  on  philosophers  and  theologians,  the  second 
did  not  agree  that  philosophers  should  be  called  upon  to  uphold  the 
truth  of  the  Faith,  since  in  this  way  a  confusion  might  arise  between 
theology  and  philosophy,  which  would  damage  the  freedom  of  philosophy. 
At  the  ninth  sitting  the  curialist,  Antonio  Pucci,  spoke  on  reform,  and 


1515-7]  Close  of  the  Fifth  Later  an  Council  31 

said  that  the  clergy  had  fallen  away  from  love ;  that  the  tyranny  of 
inordinate  desire  had  taken  its  place  ;  that  their  lives  were  in  opposition 
to  the  teaching  and  canons  of  the  Church.  The  bull  of  reformation 
published  after  this,  Supernae  dispositionis  arbitrio,  was  concerned 
with  the  higher  appointments  in  the  Church,  elections,  postulations, 
provisions,  the  deposing  and  translation  of  prelates,  commendams,  unions, 
dispensations,  reservations  ;  with  Cardinals  and  the  Curia  ;  reform  in  the 
life  of  priests  and  laity  ;  the  incomes  and  immunities  of  clerics  ;  the  wide 
spread  of  superstition  and  false  Christianity.  The  reform  of  the  Calen- 
dar was  also  debated,  but  at  the  tenth  sitting  (May,  1515)  proved  still 
unripe  for  discussion ;  the  sitting  was  then  devoted  to  the  contentions 
of  the  bishops  and  the  regular  clergy  ;  resolutions  were  passed  concerning 
money-lenders  ;  and  Leo's  bull  pointed  out  the  duty  of  furthering  bene- 
ficial modern  institutions.  Of  great  interest  is  the  bull  concerning  the 
printing  and  publishing  of  books  :  it  attributes  the  invention  of  printing 
to  the  favour  of  Heaven,  but  adds  that  what  was  made  for  the  glory  of 
God  ought  not  to  be  used  against  Plim,  for  which  reason  all  new  books 
were  to  be  subjected  to  the  censorship  of  the  Bishops  and  Inquisitors. 

The  eleventh  sitting  was  occupied  with  the  complaints  of  the  Bishops 
against  the  Regulars,  whom  Aegidius  of  Viterbo  defended  (December  19, 
1516).  It  was  declared  unlawful  to  foretell  coming  misfortunes  from 
the  pulpit  with  any  reference  to  a  definite  date ;  this  was  probably  a 
retarded  censure  on  Savonarola.  The  bull  Pastor  Aeternus  was  issued, 
which  proclaimed  the  abolition  of  the  Pragmatic  Sanction.  Leo  declared 
it  null  and  void,  and  confirmed  the  decision  of  the  bull  Unam  Sanctam 
issued  by  Boniface  VIII,  that  all  Christians  are  subject  to  the  Pope. 
At  this  point  the  ordinances  for  the  clergy  and  their  privileges  were 
read.  At  the  twelfth  sitting  Giovanni  Francesco  Pico  della  Mirandola 
presented  his  Oratio  de  Reformayidis  AToribus  to  the  Pope.  In  it  he 
announces  to  Leo  that  should  the  Pope  delay  healing  the  wounds  of 
society,  He  whose  representative  the  Pope  was,  would  cut  off  the  cor- 
rupted members  with  fire  and  sword,  and  scatter  them  abroad,  sending 
a  terrible  judgment  on  the  Church.  Christ,  he  said,  had  cast  out  the 
doves  and  pigeons  that  were  sold  in  the  Temple ;  why  should  not  Leo 
exile  the  worshippers  of  the  many  Golden  Calves,  who  had  not  only 
a  place,  but  a  place  of  command  in  Rome  ?  This  again  was  a  remi- 
niscence of  Savonarola's  sermons.  Pico  had  constituted  himself  his 
biographer  and  apologist.  It  was  strange  that  the  flaming  words  of  the 
prophet  should  rise  once  more  from  the  grave  at  the  moment  when  their 
terrible  prophecy  was  to  be  fulfilled  in  Germany. 

On  March  16,  1517,  the  Council  closed  with  its  twelfth  sitting.  It 
had  made  many  useful  orders,  and  shown  good  intentions  to  abolish 
various  abuses.  But  the  carrying  out  of  the  contemplated  reforms  of 
the  Curia  was  entirely  neglected.  The  Council  was  from  first  to  last 
a  dead  letter,  and,  even  had  it  gained  effect  for  its  resolutions,  the 


32  The  Concordat  with  Francis  I  [1515-6 

catastrophe  in  the  north  would  not  have  been  averted.  For  there  an 
inward  alienation  from  Rome  had  long  been  going  on,  ever  since  the 
days  of  Ludwig  the  Bavarian  ;  little  was  needed  to  make  it  externally 
also  an  accomplished  fact.  Neither  Leo  nor  his  Lateran  Council  had 
the  slightest  conception  of  this  state  of  affairs  north  of  the  Alps. 

The  government  of  the  Church  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  Italians  ; 
the  Curia  could  count  scarcely  more  than  one  or  two  Germans  or  Eng- 
lish in  their  number.  Terrible  retribution  was  at  hand.  Leo  X  had 
seen  no  trace  of  the  coming  religious  crisis,  although  its  forerunners, 
Reuchlin  and  Erasmus,  Wimpheling  and  Hutten,  and  the  appearance  of 
Obscurorum  Virorum  Ejnstolae  might  well  have  opened  his  eyes.  His 
announcement  in  the  midst  of  all  this  ferment  of  the  great  Absolution 
for  the  benefit  of  St  Peter's  was  a  stupendous  miscalculation,  due  to 
the  thoughtless  and  contemptuous  treatment  vouchsafed  to  German 
affairs  in  Rome.  Instead  of  directing  his  most  serious  attention  to 
them  Leo  had  meantime  made  his  covenant  with  Francis  I  at  Bologna 
(December,  1515),  on  which  followed  directly  the  French  treaty  of  1516. 
At  Bologna  the  King  had  renounced  the  Pragmatic  Sanction,  in  return 
for  which  the  Pope  granted  him  the  right  of  nomination  to  bishoprics, 
abbeys,  and  conventual  priories.  It  was  the  most  immoral  covenant 
that  Church  history  had  hitherto  recorded,  for  the  parties  presented 
each  other  with  things  that  did  not  belong  to  them.  The  French 
Church  fell  a  victim  to  an  agreement  which  delivered  over  her  freedom 
to  royal  despotism ;  in  return  Francis  I  undertook  that  the  Pope's 
family  should  rule  in  Florence,  and  as  a  pledge  of  the  treaty  gave  a 
French  Princess  to  the  Pope's  nephew  Lorenzo  in  marriage. 

The  hour  in  which  this  compact  was  made  was  the  darkest  in  Leo's 
pontificate.  North  of  the  Alps  this  act  undermined  all  confidence  in 
him  or  in  his  cousin  Clement  VII.  No  further  reform  of  the  Church 
was  expected  of  two  Popes  who  cared  more  for  their  dynasty  than  for 
the  welfare  of  Christendom.  The  short  interregnum  of  Adrian  VI  was, 
as  we  have  seen,  not  equal  to  the  task  of  carrying  out  the  reformation. 
But  it  must  be  remembered  that  in  his  reign  the  worthiest  representative 
of  the  Church's  conscience  during  the  Medicean  era  came  forward  once 
more  with  a  plea  for  reform.  The  great  document,  laid  before  the  Pope 
at  his  command,  by  Aegidius  of  Viterbo,  revealed  the  disease,  when  it 
pointed  to  the  misuse  of  papal  power  as  the  cause  of  all  the  harm,  and 
demanded  a  limitation  to  the  absolutism  of  the  Head  of  the  Church. 
This  tallied  with  the  Pope's  ideas,  and  the  celebrated  instruction  issued 
to  the  Nuncio  Chieregato  (1522),  which  announced  that  the  disease  had 
come  from  the  head  to  the  members,  from  the  Pope  to  the  prelates,  and 
confessed,  "  We  have  all  sinned,  and  there  is  not  one  that  doeth  good." 

Alessandro  Farnese  came  forth  from  the  Conclave  of  1534  on 
October  12  as  Paul  III.     A  pupil  of  Pomponio  Leto,  and  at  the  age  of 


1534-72]    Paul  III —  The  Counter- Reformation  in  Italy    33 

twenty-five,  in  1493,  invested  with  tlie  purple  by  Alexander  VI,  he  had 
taken  part  in  all  phases  of  the  humanistic  movement,  and  shared  its 
glories  and  its  sins.  Now  the  sky  had  become  overcast,  but  a  clear 
sunny  gleam  from  the  best  time  of  the  Renaissance  still  lay  over  hira, 
though  his  pontificate  was  to  witness  the  inroad  of  Lutheranism  on 
Italy,  the  appearance  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  and  on 
the  other  hand  the  foundation  of  the  Society  of  Jesus  (September  3, 
1539),  the  convocation  of  the  long  wished-for  Ecumenical  Council 
of  Trent  (1542),  and  also  the  reorganisation  of  the  Inquisition 
(1541). 

The  last  Pope  of  the  Renaissance,  as  we  must  call  Farnese,  left  as 
the  brightest  memory  of  his  reign  the  record  of  an  effort,  which  proved 
fruitless,  to  unite  the  last  and  noblest  supporters  of  the  Renaissance 
who  still  survived  in  the  service  of  the  Church,  for  an  attempt  at 
reformation.  This  is  celebrated  as  the  Consultum  delectorum  Card'ma- 
lium  et  aliorum  prelatorum  de  emendanda  Ecclesia,  and  bears  the  signa- 
tures of  Contarini,  Caraffa,  Sadoleto,  Reginald  Pole,  Federigo  Fregoso, 
Giberti,  and  Cortese.  Contarini  must  be  acknowledged  to  have  been 
the  real  soul  of  the  movement,  which  aimed  at  an  inward  reconciliation 
with  the  German  party  of  reform.  All  these  ideas  had  root  in  the 
conception  represented  by  the  scheme  of  Julius  II.  The  greater  number 
of  those  who  worked  at  the  Consultum  of  1538  must  be  regarded  as  the 
last  direct  heirs  of  this  great  inheritance.  The  Religious  Conference  of 
Ratisbon  in  1541  forms  the  crisis  in  the  history  of  this  movement  :  it 
was  wrecked,  not,  as  Reumont  states,  by  the  incompatibility  of  the 
principle  of  subjective  opinion  with  that  of  authority,  but  quite  as 
much,  if  not  more  so,  by  the  private  aims  of  Bavaria  and  France.  So 
ended  the  movement  towards  reconciliation,  and  another  came  into  force 
and  obtained  sole  dominion.  This  regarded  the  most  marked  opposition 
to  Protestantism  as  the  salvation  of  the  Church,  and  to  combat  it 
summoned  not  only  the  counter-reformation  of  the  Tridentinum,  but 
every  means  in  its  power,  even  the  extremest  measures  of  material 
force,  to  its  assistance.  The  representatives  of  the  conciliatory  reform 
movement,  Contarini,  Sadoleto,  Pole,  Morone,  became  suspect  and, 
despite  their  dignity  of  Cardinal,  were  subject  to  persecution.  Even 
noble  ladies  like  Vittoria  Colonna  and  Giulia  Gonzaga  were  not  secure 
from  this  suspicion  and  persecution. 

Paul  IV  (1555-9)  and  Pius  V  (1566-72)  carried  out  the  Counter- 
Reformation  in  Italy.  While  the  pagan  elements  of  humanism  merged 
in  the  Antitrinitarian  and  Socinian  sects,  the  Inquisition  was  stamping 
out  the  sola  fides  belief,  but  its  terrorism  at  the  same  time  crushed 
culture  and  intellectual  life  out  of  Italy.  The  city  of  Rome  recovered 
from  the  Sack  of  1527  ;  but  from  the  ruin  wrought  by  Caraffa,  the  nation, 
or  at  any  rate  Papal  Rome,  never  recovered.  Whatever  intellectual  life 
still  remained  was  forced  in  the  days  of  Paul  III  to  shrink  more  and 

C.    M.    H.    II.  3 


34  The  fate  of  Italy 


more  from  publicity.  The  sonnets  which  Vittoria  Colouna  and  Michel- 
angelo exchanged,  the  converse  these  two  great  minds  held  in  the 
garden  of  the  Villa  Colonna,  of  which  Francesco  d'  Ollanda  has  left  us 
an  account,  were  the  last  flickerings  of  a  spirit  which  had  once  controlled 
and  enriched  the  Renaissance. 

What  comparisons  must  have  forced  themselves  on  Michelangelo  as 
all  the  events  since  the  days  of  Lorenzo  il  Magnijico,  his  first  patron, 
whom  he  never  forgot,  passed  in  review  before  his  great  and  lonely 
spirit,  now  sunk  in  gloom.  We  know  from  Condivi  that  the  impressions 
Buonarotte  had  received  in  his  youth  exercised  a  renewed  power  over 
his  old  age.  Dante  and  Savonarola  were  once  his  leaders,  they  had 
never  entirely  forsaken  him.  Now  the  favole  del  mondo,  as  his  last 
poems  bear  witness,  fell  entirely  into  the  background  before  the  earnest 
thoughts  that  had  once  filled  his  mind  at  the  foot  of  the  pulpit  in 
San  Marco.  His  Criudizio  Universale  sums  up  the  account  for  his  whole 
existence,  and  is  at  the  same  time  the  most  terrible  reckoning,  made  in 
the  spirit  of  Dante,  with  his  own  nation  and  its  rulers.  All  that  Italy 
might  have  become,  had  she  followed  the  dictates  of  Dante  and  Savonarola, 
floated  before  his  eyes  as  his  brush  created  that  Judge  of  all  the  Avorld 
whose  curse  falls  on  those  that  have  exiled  and  murdered  His  prophets, 
neglected  the  Church,  and  bartered  away  the  freedom  of  the  nation.  His 
Last  Judgment  was  painted  at  the  bidding  of  the  Pope.  Paul  III  can 
scarcely  have  guessed  how  the  artist  was  searching  into  the  consciences 
of  that  whole  generation,  which  was  called  to  execute  what  Julius 
had  bidden  Raffaelle  and  Michelangelo  depict  for  all  Christendom,  and 
which  had  ignored  and  neglected  its  high  office. 

Since  1541  the  Schism  was  an  accomplished  fact,  a  misfortune  alike 
for  North  and  South.  The  defection  of  the  Germanic  world  deprived 
the  Catholic  Church  of  an  element  to  which  the  future  belonged  after 
the  exhaustion  of  the  Latin  races.  Perhaps  the  greatest  misfortune  lay 
and  still  lies,  as  Newman  has  said,  in  the  fact  that  the  Latin  races 
never  realised,  and  do  not  even  yet  realise,  what  they  have  lost  in  the 
Germanic  races.  From  the  time  of  Paul  III,  and  still  more  from  that 
of  Paul  IV  onwards,  the  old  Catholicism  changes  into  an  Italianism 
which  adopts  more  and  more  the  forms  of  the  Roman  Curialism.  The 
idea  of  Catholicity,  once  so  comprehensive,  was  sinking  more  and  more 
into  a  one-sided,  often  despotic  insistence  on  unity,  i-endered  almost 
inevitable  by  the  continual  struggle  with  opponents.  And  this  was  due, 
not  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  but  to  her  practice.  Romanism 
alone  could  no  longer  carry  out  a  scheme  such  as  that  of  which  Julius  II 
had  dreamed.  It  is  now  clear  to  all  minds  what  intellectual,  moral, 
and  social  forces  the  schism  had  drawn  away  ;  this  is  manifest  even  in 
the  fate  of  Italy.  The  last  remnant  of  Italian  idealism  took  refuge  in 
the  idea  of  national  unity  and  freedom  which  had  been  shadowed  forth 
in  the  policy  of  Alexander  VI  and  Julius  II,  and  which  Machiavelli  had 


The  fate  of  Italy  35 


written  on  the  last  wonderful  page  of  his,  Principe  as  the  guiding  principle 
for  the  future.  This  vision  it  was  which  rose  dimly  in  Dante's  mind  ; 
for  its  sake  the  Italian  people  had  forgiven  the  sins  of  the  Borgia  and 
of  della  Kovere  ;  it  had  aj)peared  to  Machiavelli  as  the  highest  of  aims  ; 
after  another  three  hundred  years  of  spiritual  and  temporal  despotism  it 
burst  forth  once  more  in  the  minds  of  Rosmini,  Cesare  Balbo,  Gioberti, 
and  Cavour,  and  roused  the  dishonoured  soul  of  the  nation. 


CHAPTER   II 

HABSBURG  AND  VALOIS   (I) 

The  secular  struggle  between  the  Houses  of  Burgundy  and  Valois 
reaches  a  new  stage  in  the  era  of  the  Reformation.  The  murder  of  the 
Duke  of  Orleans  in  the  streets  of  Paris  in  1407  involved  at  first  only  a 
junior  branch  of  the  French  royal  House  in  the  blood  feud  with  Burgundy. 
The  alliance  of  Orleans  and  Armagnac  in  1410,  and  of  both  with 
Charles  the  Dauphin  in  1418,  swept  in  the  senior  branch,  and  led  to  the 
retributive  murder  of  John  of  Burgundy  at  Montereau  in  1419.  Steadily 
the  area  of  infection  widens.  A  relentless  Ate  dominates  all  the  early 
years  of  Philip  the  Good,  and  then,  laid  for  a  while  to  sleep  at  Arras 
(1435),  reappears  in  the  days  of  Charles  the  Bold.  Not  only  political 
and  national  aims,  but  an  hereditary  dynastic  hatred  might  have  inspired 
Louis  XI  in  his  campaigns  of  war  and  intrigue  until  the  crushing  blow 
at  Nancy.  The  grandson  of  Charles  the  Bold,  Philip  the  Fair,  seemed, 
in  his  jealousy  of  Ferdinand  and  his  devotion  to  the  interests  of  the 
Netherlands,  to  have  forgotten  the  ancestral  feud.  But  his  son  and 
heir,  whom  we  know  best  as  Charles  the  Fifth,  inherited,  together  with 
the  inconsequent  rivalries  of  Maximilian,  and  the  more  enduring  and 
successful  antagonism  of  Ferdinand,  the  old  Burgundian  duty  of  revenge. 
Thus  the  chronic  hostility  between  the  Kings  of  Valois-Angouleme  and 
the  united  line  of  Burgundy,  Austria,  Castile,  and  Aragon  has  a  dramatic 
touch  of  predestined  doom,  which  might  find  a  fitting  counterpart  in  a 
Norse  Saga  or  the  Nibelungenlied. 

But  greater  forces  than  hereditary  hate  drove  Europe  to  the  gulf  in 
which  the  joy  of  the  Renaissance  was  for  ever  extinguished.  The  terri- 
torial consolidation  of  the  previous  age  in  Eui'ope,  though  striking,  had 
been  incomplete.  The  union  of  the  French  and  Spanish  kingdoms  had 
gone  on  natural  lines.  But  Italy  had  been  less  fortunate.  At  the  death 
of  Ferdinand  her  fate  was  still  uncertain.  The  Spaniards  stood  firm  in 
Sicily  and  Naples,  the  French  seemed  to  stand  secure  in  Milan.  Venice 
had  withstood  the  shock  of  united  Europe.  Florence  seemed  strengthened 
by  the  personal  protection  of  the  Holy  Father.  But  so  long  as  two 
rival  foreign  Powers  held  their  ground  in  Italy,  consolidation  had  gone 

36 


1516-9]      Rivalry  and  resources  of  the  two  Powers  37 

too  far  or  not  far  enough.  Italy  must  be  either  Italian  or  Spanish  or 
French.  The  equilibrium  was  unstable.  No  amicable  arrangement 
could  permanently  preserve  the  status  quo.  The  issue  could  only  be 
solved  by  the  arbitrament  of  arms. 

In  Germany  the  case  was  different.  Their  consolidation  seemed  to 
be  out  of  the  question.  Neither  the  preponderance  of  any  single  Power, 
nor  that  of  any  combination  of  Powers,  held  out  hopes  of  successful  con- 
quest. And  the  German  nation,  inured  to  arms,  could  offer  a  very  different 
resistance  to  that  which  any  of  the  Italian  States  could  maintain.  Thus 
the  history  of  Europe  in  this  period  falls  into  two  well  marked  sections. 
The  Teutonic  lands  work  out  their  own  development  under  the  influence 
of  the  new  religious  thought,  unaffected  as  a  whole  by  the  competition 
for  supremacy  in  Europe.  They  had  their  own  dangers  from  the  Turk 
and  in  civil  strife.  But  the  struggle,  although  ostensibly  between  the 
Emperor  and  the  King  of  France,  was  in  reality  between  Spain  and 
France  for  hegemony  in  western  Europe,  supremacy  in  Italy.  The 
struggle  was  dynastic,  but  dynasties  are  the  threads  about  which  nations 
crystallise. 

At  the  outset  the  forces  were  not  ill-matched.  On  the  death 
of  Ferdinand  in  1516  the  Archduke  Charles  succeeded  by  hereditary 
right  to  the  kingdoms  of  Castile  and  Aragon  and  their  dependencies,  to 
the  kingdoms  of  the  two  Sicilies,  to  the  Franche-Comte  of  Burgundy, 
and  to  the  provinces  of  the  Netherlands.  On  the  death  of  Maximilian 
in  1519,  he  added  to  these  the  Habsburg  inheritance  in  eastern  Europe, 
which  he  wisely  resigned  before  long  to  his  brother  Ferdinand.  For 
soldiers  he  could  rely  on  his  Spanish  dominions,  on  the  regular  forces 
organised  by  Charles  the  Bold  in  the  Netherlands,  on  the  less  trust- 
worthy levies  of  Germany  and  Italy.  The  Netherlands  and  Spain  gave 
him  a  considerable  revenue,  which  exceeded  in  gross  the  revenue  of  the 
French  King,  but  was  not  equally  available  for  common  dynastic  pur- 
poses, owing  to  the  difficulty  of  exporting  and  transporting  treasure,  and 
the  cogent  necessities  of  internal  government.  The  Sicilies  might  pay 
for  their  own  government,  and  provide  an  occasional  supplement,  but 
the  resources  of  these  kingdoms  hardly  compensated  for  the  needs  of 
their  defence.  The  maritime  resources  of  Spain  were  considerable,  but 
ill-organised  and  therefore  not  readily  available. 

The  French  King  on  the  other  hand,  though  his  dominions  were  less 
extensive,  had  manifest  advantages  both  for  attack  and  defence.  His 
territory  was  compact,  and  almost  all  capacity  for  internal  resistance  had 
been  crushed  out  by  the  vigorous  policy  of  Louis  XI  and  Anne  of 
Beaujeu.  His  subjects  were  rich  and  flourishing,  and  far  more  indus- 
trious than  those  of  Spain.  All  their  resources  were  absolutely  at  his 
control.  Even  the  clergy  could  be  relied  upon  for  ample  subsidies. 
His  financial  system  was  superior  to  that  of  any  other  existing  State. 
He  could  make  such  laws  and  impose  such  taxes  as  suited  his  sovereign 


38  Characters  of  Francis  and  Charles         [1516-21 

pleasure.  Since  the  Concordat  of  1516  all  important  clerical  patronage 
was  in  his  hands ;  and  the  great  ecclesiastical  revenues  served  him  as  a 
convenient  means  for  rewarding  ministers,  and  attaching  to  himself  the 
great  families  whose  cadets  were  greedy  of  spiritual  promotion.  His 
cavalry  and  artillery  were  excellent  and  well  organised.  His  infantry 
had  not  yet  been  satisfactorily  developed,  but  his  resources  permitted 
him  to  engage  mercenaries,  and  Germans  and  Swiss  were  still  read}^  to 
serve  the  highest  bidder.  In  defence  he  could  fight  upon  interior 
lines.  For  attack  he  had  a  ready  road  to  Italy  through  the  friendly 
territories  of  Savoy.  The  possession  of  Milan  secured  to  him  the 
maritime  power  of  Genoa,  a  very  valuable  addition  to  his  own. 

In  character  the  two  potentates  were  less  equall}^  matched.  Francis 
was  bold,  and  vigorous  upon  occasion,  but  inconsequent  in  action ;  his 
choice  of  men  was  directed  by  favouritism ;  his  attention  was  diverted 
from  business  by  the  pursuit  of  every  kind  of  pleasure,  the  more  as  well 
as  the  less  refined.  His  extravagance  was  such  as  to  hamper  his  public 
activity.  To  the  last  he  never  showed  any  increasing  sense  of  royal 
responsibility,  and  preserved  in  premature  old  age  the  frivolous  and 
vicious  habits  of  his  youth. 

At  the  death  of  Ferdinand  Charles  was  still  a  boy,  and,  until  the 
death  of  Guillaume  de  Croy,  Sire  de  Chievres  (1521),  his  own  individual- 
ity did  not  make  itself  clearly  felt.  Chievres,  his  old  tutor,  now  his  prin- 
cipal minister,  dominated  his  action.  Yet  at  the  election  to  the  Empire 
it  was  his  own  pertinacity  that  secured  for  him  the  victory  when  others 
would  have  been  content  to  obtain  the  prize  for  his  brother  Ferdinand. 
Throughout  his  life  this  pre-eminent  trait  of  manly  perseverance  marks 
him  with  a  certain  stamp  of  greatness.  Slow  in  action,  deliberate  in 
council  to  the  point  of  irresolution,  he  yet  pursued  his  ends  with 
unfailing  obstinacy  until  by  sheer  endurance  he  prevailed.  Extreme 
tenacity  in  the  maintenance  of  his  just  rights,  moderation  in  victory, 
and  abstinence  from  all  chimerical  enterprise,  are  the  other  qualities  to 
Avhich  he  owes  such  success  as  he  obtained.  Fortune  served  him  well  on 
more  than  one  conspicuous  occasion ;  but  he  merited  her  favours  by 
indefatigable  patience ;  and  he  never  made  on  her  exorbitant  demands. 
Of  his  two  grandfathers  he  resembles  Ferdinand  far  more  than  Maxi- 
milian. In  the  course  of  his  career  these  characteristics  were  developed 
and  became  more  notable  ;  unlike  his  rival  he  learnt  from  life  ;  but  from 
his  youth  he  was  serious,  persistent,  sober.  In  his  choice  of  ministers 
and  judgment  of  men  he  showed  himself  greatly  superior  to  Francis. 
He  was  well  served  throughout  his  life  ;  and  never  allowed  a  minister  to 
become  his  master.  Unsympathetic,  unimaginative,  he  lacked  the  en- 
dearing graces  of  a  popular  sovereign ;  he  lacked  the  gifts  that  achieve 
greatness.  But,  born  to  greatness,  he  maintained  unimpaired  the 
heritage  he  had  received ;  and,  at  whatever  price  of  personal  and 
national  exhaustion,  he  left  the  House  of  Habsburg  greater  than  he 


1515-7]  The  Peace  of  Noyon  39 

had  found  it.  When  we  consider  the  ineluctable  burden  of  his  several 
and  discrete  realms,  the  perplexing  and  multifarious  dangers  to  which 
he  was  exposed,  the  mere  mechanical  friction  occasioned  by  distance  and 
boundaries  and  intervening  hostile  lands,  the  inefficient  organisation,  po- 
litical, financial,  and  military,  of  his  countries  at  that  time,  the  obstacles 
opposed  by  institutions  guarding  extinct  and  impossible  local  privilege, 
the  world-shaking  problems  which  broke  up  all  previous  settled  order, 
then  the  conscientious  sincerity  with  which  he  addressed  his  mediocre 
talents  to  the  allotted  work  must  earn  for  him  at  least  a  place  in  our  esteem. 

On  neither  side  was  the  struggle  for  world-empire.  Charles  would 
have  been  content  to  recover  Milan  in  self-defence,  and  the  duchy  of 
Burgundy  as  his  hereditary  and  indefeasible  right.  France  has  good 
grounds  for  claiming  Milan  and  Naples.  But  it  is  doubtful  whether 
Francis  would  have  been  as  moderate  after  victory  as  Charles. 

The  struggle  can  be  considered  apart  from  developments  in  Germany. 
But  it  has  its  reaction  on  German  fortunes.  Had  Charles  not  been 
hampered  throughout  his  career  by  the  contest  with  France  he  would 
not  have  been  forced  to  temporise  with  the  Reforming  movement  until 
it  was  too  late  for  effective  action.  The  Most  Christian  King  was  an 
unconscious  ally  of  Luther,  as  he  was  a  deliberate  ally  of  the  Turk. 
Immediately  the  conflict  concerned  the  fate  of  Italy.  Indirectly  it 
weakened  the  resistance  of  Europe  to  the  Reformed  opinions,  and  to  the 
Muslim  in  Eastern  Europe  and  the  Mediterranean. 

After  Marignano  (1515)  and  the  Peace  of  Noyon  (1516),  which  pro- 
fessed to  shelve  all  outstanding  questions  and  secure  perpetual  friendship 
between  Spain  and  France,  Europe  had  peace  for  a  while.  It  was 
arranged  at  Noyon  that  Charles  should  take  Louise,  the  daughter  of  the 
King  of  France,  to  wife,  and  that  the  rights  over  the  kingdom  of  Naples 
should  go  with  her.  Until  this  babe-in-arms  should  become  his  wife, 
Charles  was  to  pay  100,000  crowns  a  year  as  rent  for  Naples,  and  50,000 
until  she  bore  him  a  son.  If  Louise  died,  some  daughter  of  a  later  birth 
was  to  be  substituted  as  his  affianced  bride,  and  this  clause  actually  took 
effect.  Charles  promised  satisfaction  with  regard  to  Spanish  Navarre, 
conquered  by  Ferdinand  in  1512  ;  perhaps  he  even  secretly  engaged 
himself  to  restore  it  to  Catharine,  its  lawful  queen,  within  six  months. 
The  treaty  was  concluded  under  the  influence  of  Flemish  counsellors,  who 
had  surrounded  Charles,  since  he  had  taken  up  the  government  of  the 
Netherlands  in  the  previous  year.  It  was  inspired  by  a  desire  for  peace 
with  France  in  interests  exclusively  Burgundian.  But  it  had  also  its 
value  for  Spain,  for  it  gave  Charles  a  breathing  space  in  which  to  settle 
the  affairs  of  his  new  kingdoms.  Maximilian,  now  in  isolation,  was 
forced  to  come  to  terms  with  France  and  Venice,  and  surrender  Verona  ; 
and  peace  was  secured  in  Italy  for  a  while.  At  a  subsequent  conference 
at  Cambray  in  1517  the  partition  of  Italy  between  Habsburgand  Valois 


40      The  candidature  for  the  Election  to  the  Empire  [i5l7-9 

was  discussed,  but  nothing  was  definitely  settled.  English  diplomatists 
looked  on  askance  at  the  apparent  reconciliation,  but  their  hopes  of 
fishing  in  troubled  waters  were  soon  revived. 

Charles  utilised  the  respite  for  his  visit  to  Spain  in  1517.  While 
here  he  was  not  only  occupied  with  the  troublesome  affairs  of  his  new- 
kingdoms,  but  with  the  question  of  the  Empire.  Maximilian,  who, 
although  not  yet  sixty  years  of  age,  was  worn  out  by  his  tumultuous 
life,  was  anxious  to  secure  the  succession  to  his  grandson.  At  the  Diet 
of  Augsburg,  1518,  he  received  the  promise  of  the  Electors  of  Mainz, 
Cologne,  the  Palatinate,  Brandenburg,  and  Bohemia  for  the  election  of 
Charles  as  Roman  King.  The  French  King  was  already  in  the  field,  but 
the  promises  and  influence  of  Maximilian,  and  the  money  which  Charles 
was  able  to  supply,  overbore  for  the  moment  this  powerful  antagonism. 
On  the  receipt  of  this  news  Pope  Leo  X,  who  had  already  been 
attracted  to  the  side  of  France,  was  seriously  alarmed.  The  union  of 
the  imperial  power  with  the  throne  of  Xaples  was  contrary  to  the  time- 
honoured  doctrines  of  papal  policy.  Thenceforward  he  declared  himself 
more  openly  a  supporter  of  the  French  claims.  Meanwhile,  if  Charles 
was  to  be  elected  before  Maximilian's  death,  the  latter  must  first  receive 
from  the  Pope  the  imperial  crown.  This  Leo  refused  to  facilitate.  In 
all  this  the  Pope  showed  himself  as  ever  more  mindfid  of  the  temporal 
interests  of  the  Roman  See  and  of  Ms  own  dynastic  profit,  than  of  the 
good  of  Europe  or  religion.  Both  in  the  coming  struggle  with  victorious 
Islam,  and  against  the  impending  religious  danger,  an  intimate  alliance 
with  Charles  was  of  far  more  value  than  the  support  of  France.  But 
the  meaner  motives  prevailed. 

On  January  19,  1519,  Maximilian  died,  and  the  struggle  broke  out 
in  a  new  form.  The  promises  of  the  Electors  proved  to  be  of  no 
account.  All  had  to  be  done  over  again.  The  zeal  of  his  agents,  his 
more  abundant  supplies  of  ready  cash,  the  support  of  the  Pope,  at  first 
gave  Francis  the  advantage.  Troubles  broke  out  in  the  Austrian 
dominions.  Things  looked  black  in  Spain.  Even  the  wise  Margaret 
of  Savoy  lost  hope,  and  recommended  that  Ferdinand  should  be  put 
forward  in  place  of  Charles.  Charles  showed  himself  more  resolute  and 
a  better  judge  of  the  situation.  He  had  friends  in  Germany,  Germans, 
who  understood  German  politics  better  than  the  emissaries  of  Francis. 
The  influence  of  England  on  either  side  was  discounted  by  Henry  YIIFs 
own  candidature.  German  opinion  was  decidedly  in  favour  of  a  German 
election,  and  although  Charles  was  by  birth,  education,  and  sympathy  a 
Netherlander,  yet  the  interests  of  his  House  in  Germany  were  important, 
and  it  may  not  have  been  generally  known  how  little  German  were  his 
predilections.  The  great  house  of  Fugger  came  courageously  to  his  aid 
and  advanced  no  less  than  500,000  florins.  The  advantage  of  this 
support  lay  not  only  in  the  sum  supplied,  but  in  the  preference  of  the 
Electors  for  Augsburg  bills.     The  Elector  of  Mainz  refused  to  accept 


1519-20]    The  Imperial  Election  and  its  significance  41 

any  paper  other  than  the  obligations  of  well-known  German  merchants. 
At  the  critical  moment  Francis  could  not  get  credit.  The  Swabian 
League  forbade  the  merchants  of  Augsburg  to  accept  his  bills.  He 
endeavoured  in  vain  to  raise  money  in  Genoa  and  in  Lyons. 

It  is  needless  to  pursue  the  base  intrigues  and  tergiversations  of  the 
several  Electors.  The  Elector  of  Saxony  played  the  most  honourable 
part,  for  he  refused  to  be  a  candidate  himself,  and  declined  all  personal 
gratification.  The  Elector  of  Mainz  showed  himself  perhaps  the  most 
greedy  and  unfaithful.  He  received  100,000  florins  from  Charles  alone 
and  the  promise  of  a  pension  of  10,000,  which  it  is  satisfactory  to  note 
was  not  regularly  paid.  Money  on  the  one  hand,  and  popular  pressure 
on  the  other  decided  the  issue.  The  Rhinelands,  where  the  possessions 
of  four  Electors  lay  and  where  the  election  was  to  take  place,  were 
enthusiastic  for  the  Habsburg  candidature.  It  was  here  that  the 
national  idea  was  strongest,  and  the  humanists  were  eloquent  in  their 
support  of  Maximilian's  grandson.  The  army  of  the  Swabian  League, 
under  Franz  von  Sickingen,  the  great  German  condottiere,  was  ready 
to  act  on  behalf  of  Charles ;  it  had  been  recently  engaged  in  evicting 
the  Duke  Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg  from  his  dominions,  and  was  now 
secured  by  Charles  for  three  mouths  for  his  own  service.  Here  also 
money  had  its  value.  Sickingen  and  the  Swabian  League  received 
171,000  florins.  At  the  end  the  Pope  gave  way  and  withdrew  his 
opposition.  On  June  28,  1519,  the  Electors  at  Frankfort  voted 
unanimously  for  the  election  of  Charles.  The  election  cost  him 
850,000  florins. 

It  is  a  commonplace  of  historians  to  exclaim  at  the  fruitless  waste  of 
energy  involved  in  this  electoral  struggle,  and  to  point  out  that  Charles 
was  not  richer  or  more  powerful  as  Emperor  than  he  was  before  ;  while 
on  the  other  hand  his  obligations  and  anxieties  were  considerably  in- 
creased. But  so  long  as  prestige  plays  its  part  in  human  affairs,  so 
long  a  reasonable  judgment  will  justify  the  ambition  of  Charles.  He 
was  still  perhaps  in  the  youthful  frame  of  mind  which  willingly  and 
ignorantly  courts  responsibility  and  faces  risks,  the  frame  of  mind  in 
which  he  entered  on  his  first  war  with  Francis,  saying,  "  Soon  he 
will  be  a  poor  King  or  I  shall  be  a  poor  Emperor."  But  the  imperial 
Crown  was  in  some  sort  hereditary  in  his  race.  Had  he  pusillanimously 
refused  it,  his  prestige  must  have  suffered  severely.  As  a  German  prince 
he  could  not  brook  the  interference  of  a  foreign  and  a  hostile  power  in 
the  affairs  of  Germany.  The  imperial  contest  was  inevitable,  and  was 
in  fact  the  peaceful  overture  to  another  contest,  equally  inevitable,  and 
more  enduring,  waged  over  half  a  continent,  through  nearly  forty  years. 

War  was  in  fact  inevitable,  and  Charles  was  ill-prepared  to  meet  it. 
His  affairs  in  Spain  went  slowly,  and  it  was  not  until  May,  1520,  that 
Charles  was  able  to  sail  for  the  north,  leaving  open  revolt  at  Valencia, 
and  discontent  in  his  other  dominions.     The  fortunate  issue  of  these 


42  Negotiations  for  alliance  [i520-i 

complications  has  been  related  in  the  first  volume  of  this  History. 
Diplomacy  had  already  paved  the  way  for  an  understanding  with 
Henry  VIII,  which  took  more  promising  shape  at  Gravelines,  after  a 
visit  to  Henry  at  Dover  and  Canterbury,  and  the  famous  interview  of 
Henry  VIII  and  Francis  I  at  the  Field  of  the  Cloth  of  Gold.  Wolsey's 
skilful  diplomacy  had  brought  it  about  that  both  the  greatest  monarchs 
of  Europe  were  bidding  eagerly  for  his  and  his  master's  favour.  A 
pension  and  a  bishopric  for  the  Cardinal,  a  renewal  for  England  of  the 
commercial  treaty  with  the  Netherlands  were  the  preliminary  price.  At 
Gravelines  it  was  agreed  that  Charles  and  Henry  should  have  the  same 
friends  and  the  same  enemies ;  and  that  neither  Power  should  conclude 
an  alliance  with  any  other  without  the  consent  of  both.  If  war  broke 
out  between  Charles  and  Francis,  Henry  was  to  act  against  the  aggressor. 
For  two  years  the  agreements  for  the  marriage  of  the  Dauphin  with  the 
English  Princess  Mary,  and  of  Charles  with  Charlotte  the  daughter  of 
Francis  (Louise  having  died)  were  to  receive  no  further  confirmation. 
Towards  the  end  of  this  period  another  meeting  was  to  take  place  at 
which  another  agreement  should  be  concluded.  Each  Power  was  to 
maintain  a  regular  ambassador  at  the  Court  of  the  other.  The  pains 
taken  by  Wolsey  to  reassure  Francis  and  to  show  that  Henry  had  re- 
jected propositions  from  Charles  for  a  joint  attack  on  France  prove 
that  he  was  still  anxious  to  prevent  the  Roman  King  from  drawing 
near  to  France ;  but  the  nett  result  of  the  interviews  was  to  guarantee 
Charles  against  any  immediate  adhesion  of  England  to  his  rival. 

Fortified  by  this  belief,  and  leaving  his  aunt  Margaret  of  Savoy 
to  govern  the  Netherlands  with  extensive  powers,  Charles  proceeded 
to  his  coronation,  which  took  place  at  Aachen  on  October  23,  1520. 
Meanwhile  in  Castile  and  Valencia  the  troubles  continued,  until  the 
rising  of  the  Comuneros  was  definitely  crushed  at  the  battle  of  Villalar, 
April  24,  1521.  Charles  was  thus  relieved  from  one  of  his  worst 
anxieties,  though  the  condition  of  his  finances  was  so  bad  that  he  could 
only  look  with  alarm  on  the  prospect  of  war.  All  his  Spanish  revenues 
were  pledged  and  nothing  could  be  expected  from  that  source.  Still 
the  outbreak  of  war  was  delayed,  and  he  was  able  to  bring  the  Diet 
of  Worms  to  a  close  before  any  decisive  step  was  needed.  And  more 
important  still,  in  the  eager  hunt  for  alliances  on  both  sides,  Charles 
proved  the  more  successful.  On  Ma}^  29,  1521,  a  secret  alliance  had 
been  concluded  on  his  behalf  with  the  Pope. 

From  the  time  of  the  imperial  election  Leo  had  foreseen  the  con- 
sequences, and  had  turned  his  shallow  statecraft  to  the  task  of  considering 
what  could  be  got  for  the  Papal  See  and  his  own  family  from  the  im- 
pending war.  At  first  he  had  urged  a  prompt  and  united  attack  upon 
Charles,  in  which  France,  Venice,  and  England  were  to  join.  This  might 
well  have  succeeded  while  Charles  was  still  embroiled  in  Castile.  Then 
while  negotiations  with  France  and  England  flagged  and  each  Power  was 


I52i]       Charles  allied  with  Leo  X  and  Henry  VIII         43 

manoeuvring  for  the  weather-gauge,  Leo  began  to  see  that  France  and 
Venice  could  never  consent  to  his  favourite  scheme  for  the  annexation 
of  Ferrara,  the  one  part  of  Julius'  design  which  yet  remained  un- 
executed. France  was  closely  linked  with  Alfonso  d'  Este,  and  Venice 
preferred  him  as  a  neighbour  to  the  Pope.  Then  Leo  turned  to  Charles, 
and  Charles  was  read}^  to  promise  all  that  he  could  ask  —  Parma, 
Piacenza,  Ferrara,  imperial  protection  for  the  Medici,  the  restoration  of 
Francesco  Sforza  in  Milan  and  the  Adorni  in  Genoa,  and  the  suppression 
of  the  enemies  of  the  Catholic  faith.  In  return  the  Pope  promised  the 
investiture  of  Naples,  and  a  defensive  alliance.  Leo  would  have  been 
glad  to  make  the  alliance  offensive,  but  the  Emj^eror  was  in  no  hurry 
for  war,  and  still  hoped  that  it  might  be  averted. 

The  alliance  with  Leo  was  valuable  to  Charles  for  the  resources, 
material  and  spiritual,  which  the  Pope  and  the  Medici  controlled,  for 
the  protection  which  the  Papal  States  afforded  against  attacks  on 
Naples  from  the  north,  and  for  the  access  they  gave  to  Lombardy 
from  the  south.  Still  more  valuable  appeared  the  alliance  with 
England,  as  securing  the  Netherlands  against  a  joint  attack.  Wolsey 
at  first  was  anxious  to  play  the  part  of  mediator  or  arbitrator  between 
the  hostile  powers.  At  length  at  Bruges  the  agreement  was  reached 
on  August  25.  Chievres  was  dead  (May  18,  1521),  and  Charles  took 
himself  the  leading  part  in  these  negotiations.  Charles  was  to  marry 
Mary,  the  daughter  of  Henry  VIII.  The  Emperor  and  King  entered 
the  most  solemn  alliance  not  only  for  the  defence  of  their  present 
possessions,  but  for  the  recovery  of  all  that  they  could  severally  claim. 
The  Emperor,  who  was  meditating  a  visit  to  Spain,  was  to  visit 
England  on  the  way.  War  was  to  be  openly  declared  in  March, 
1523.  But  if  no  suspension  of  hostilities  came  about  between  Charles 
and  France,  the  declaration  of  war  was  to  take  place  on  the  occasion 
of  Charles'  visit  to  England.  All  this  was  to  be  secured  by  the  most 
solemn  and  public  declarations  within  four  months. 

The  treaty  of  alliance,  solemn  as  it  professed  to  be,  left  something 
to  be  desired.  France  was  already  effectively  at  war  with  Charles. 
Robert  de  la  Marck,  Lord  of  Bouillon  and  Sedan,  early  in  the  year 
had  invaded  the  southern  Netherlands,  and  Duke  Charles  of  Gelders,  an 
old  ally  of  France  and  enemy  of  the  Burgundian  rulers,  had  attacked  the 
north.  Henri  d'Albret  had  marched  into  Navarre,  and  at  first  had  met 
with  considerable  success.  These  attacks  were  manifestly  supported  by 
France,  and  Charles  could  therefore  claim  the  aid  of  England  by  virtue 
of  earlier  treaties  as  the  victim  of  unprovoked  aggression.  But  for  the 
time  being  it  must  suffice  that  England  was  neutralised.  In  the  border 
warfare  which  succeeded  Charles  could  hold  his  own.  Sickingen  chastised 
the  Lord  of  Bouillon.  Henri  d'Albret  was  driven  from  Navarre  by  local 
levies.  And  although  on  the  frontier  of  the  Netherlands  things  looked 
black  for  a  while,  though  Mezieres  under  Bayard  held  out  against  attack 


44  Conquest  of  Milan. — Death  of  Leo  X  [1521 

and  the  Emperor  himself  risked  a  serious  defeat  near  Valenciennes,  though 
the  Admiral  Bonnivet  succeeded  in  occupying  Fuenterrabia,  the  most 
important  position  on  the  western  Pyrenees,  all  was  compensated  and 
more  than  compensated  by  the  seizure  of  Milan  on  November  19,  1521, 
by  the  joint  forces  of  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope.  Lombard}^  with 
the  exception  of  a  few  fortresses  was  easily  occupied,  and  in  the  north 
Tournay  capitulated.  After  these  astonishing  successes  the  death  of  Leo, 
on  December  1,  came  as  an  unexpected  blow  to  the  imperial  hopes. 
But  his  aid  had  done  its  work.  His  support  had  been  the  chief  instru- 
ment in  preventing  the  Swiss  from  assisting  Francis  with  their  full  force  ; 
papal  and  Florentine  money  had  supplied  the  needs  of  the  joint  expedi- 
tion. In  returii  he  received  before  his  death  the  news  that  Parma  and 
Piacenza  had  been  recovered  for  the  Holy  See. 

The  campaign  in  Lombardy  had  been  conducted  by  Prospero  Colonna, 
in  command  of  the  papal  and  imperial  forces,  among  which  were  16,000 
German  infantr}^  brought  by  way  of  Trent.  The  French  army  was 
commanded  by  Odet  de  Foix,  Vicomte  de  Lautrec,  who  owed  his  position 
to  his  sister's  favour  with  the  French  King.  They  w^ere  joined  b}^  a 
considerable  contingent  from  Venice.  The  Spanish  troops  under  An- 
tonio de  Ley va  and  the  Marquis  of  Pescara  came  up  slowly  from  Naples ; 
operations  began  badly ;  no  plan  of  campaign  commanded  approval ;  and 
when  at  length  the  siege  of  Parma  was  undertaken,  it  had  to  be  abandoned 
owing  to  danger  from  Ferrara.  In  October,  however,  on  the  news  of  the 
approach  of  a  body  of  Swiss,  whom  the  Pope  had  induced  to  serve  for 
the  protection  of  the  Holy  See,  Colonna  crossed  the  Po.  Giovanni  de' 
Medici  defeated  a  Venetian  force,  and  the  Marquis  of  Ferrara  suffered  a 
defeat.  Lautrec  failed  to  prevent  the  junction  of  Colonna  with  the 
Swiss.  There  were  now  Swiss  in  both  armies,  and  the  orders  of  the  Swiss 
Diet  came  to  both  armies  that  they  were  to  return.  But  the  papal  con- 
tingent held  firm,  while  those  in  the  pay  of  the  French  deserted  in  great 
numbers.  Colonna  forced  the  passage  of  the  Adda,  and  Lautrec  retired 
on  Milan,  where  the  exactions  and  repressive  measures  of  the  French 
provoked  a  Ghibelline  rising,  as  soon  as  the  enemy  appeared  before  the 
walls.  The  Venetians  led  the  flight,  and  Lautrec  abandoned  the  city 
for  Como,  whence  he  passed  to  winter  in  the  Venetian  territory. 

The  strange  election  of  Adrian  of  Utrecht  to  the  papal  throne, 
which  followed  on  the  death  of  Leo,  appeared  at  first  to  favour  the 
imperial  side.  Adrian  had  been  the  Emperor's  tutor  and  was  left  by 
him  as  regent  in  Castile  in  1520.  But  Adrian's  visionary  and  un- 
worldly character  unfitted  him  to  take  the  traditional  part  of  the  Popes 
in  Italian  politics.  It  was  long  before  he  appeared  in  Italy,  and  after 
his  arrival  he  long  endeavoured  to  maintain  neutrality.  At  last,  about 
a  month  before  his  death  in  September,  1523,  Adrian  was  forced  to  take 
a  side,  and  joined  the  Emperor. 

The  news  of  the  successes  in  Lombardy  put  an  end  to  the  exertions 


1522]  Second  campaign  in  Lonibardy  45 

of  Wolsey  to  conclude  an  armistice  between  the  Powers,  and  to  secure 
his  own  acceptance  as  arbitrator.  The  alliance  with  England  was 
confirmed,  and  Charles  was  free  to  sail  for  Spain  (May  26,  1522). 
On  his  way  he  landed  at  Dover  and  visited  Henry;  and  on  June  19  the 
treaty  of  Windsor  was  concluded,  according  to  which  both  sovereigns 
were  bound  to  invade  France  each  with  a  force  of  30,000  foot,  and 
10,000  horse  ;  the  date  named  for  this  great  effort  was  May,  1521. 

In  July,  1522,  Charles  reached  Spain  and  the  last  remnants  of 
rebellion  were  stamped  out.  Meanwhile  his  armies  in  Italy  had  been 
left  almost  to  their  own  resources.  The  ample  supplies  voted  by  the 
Netherlands  in  1521  had  been  all  expended  in  the  war  of  that  year. 
No  more  money  was  forthcoming  from  the  Pope  or  Florence.  A  great 
part  of  the  imperial  army  had  to  be  disbanded.  The  death  of  Leo 
threw  the  Swiss  entirely  on  to  the  side  of  France.  The  French  King 
moreover  found  no  more  difficulty  in  hiring  German  Landshnechte  than 
did  the  Emperor  himself.  In  the  Papal  State  the  forces  of  disorder 
reigned  unchecked,  and  the  old  tyrants  reappeared  in  Urbino,  Camerino, 
Rimini,  and  Perugia.  Early  in  March,  1522,  Lautrec  moved  across  the 
Adda  to  join  the  Swiss  who  were  coming  to  the  number  of  16,000  from 
the  passes  of  the  Alps.  The  junction  was  effected  at  Monza.  But  the 
defensive  works  of  Colonna  executed  during  the  winter  rendered  Milan 
impregnable  to  assault.  The  enthusiastic  support  of  the  Milanese 
provided  garrisons  for  the  principal  towns  of  the  duchy.  Francesco 
Sforza  entered  Milan  on  the  4th  of  April,  and  the  Milanese  were  now 
fighting  for  a  duke  of  their  own.  Lautrec,  although  reinforced  by  a 
French  force  under  his  brother  Thomas  de  Lescun,  could  achieve  nothing 
against  the  defensive  strategy  of  Colonna.  At  length  the  impatience  of 
the  Swiss,  who  demanded  battle  or  pay,  forced  the  French  to  attack  the 
enemy  in  a  strong  position  of  their  own  choosing,  called  the  Bicocca, 
three  miles  from  Milan  (April  27).  Here  they  were  repulsed  with  con- 
siderable loss,  the  Milanese  militia  doing  good  service  side  by  side  with 
the  Spaniards  and  the  Germans.  The  Swiss  then  returned  to  their 
homes,  discontented  and  humiliated,  and  the  French  army  shortly 
afterwards  evacuated  Lombardy,  excepting  the  three  castles  of  Novara, 
Milan,  and  Cremona.  Genoa  was  stormed  and  pillaged  by  the 
Imperialists  on  May  30.  A  new  government  was  set  up  in  Milan  under 
Francesco  Sforza,  though  the  unpaid  Spanish  and  German  soldiers  recom- 
pensed themselves  for  their  arrears  by  pillage  and  exactions.  In  Florence 
the  imperial  success  restored  the  Medici  authority  which  had  been 
seriously  threatened  by  malcontents  from  the  Papal  States,  supported 
by  hopes  of  French  assistance. 

The  treaty  of  Windsor  led  to  an  immediate  declaration  of  war  by 
Henry  VIII,  and  during  the  summer  of  1522  the  English  and  Spanish 
fleets  raided  the  coasts  of  Britanny  and  Normandy.  Later  an  invading 
force  under  the  Earl  of  Surrey  and  the  Count  van  Buren  entered  Picardy, 


46  Disaffection  of  the  Duke  of  Bourbon  [i522-3 

but  little  was  achieved  against  the  defensive  opposition  of  the  French. 
A  systematic  devastation  of  hostile  country  took  jplace  in  this  region. 

In  spite  of  their  ill-success  in  two  campaigns  the  French  did  not  give 
up  their  hope  of  reconquering  Milan.  Financial  distress  had  again 
forced  the  Emperor  to  reduce  his  forces,  and  the  necessary  means  were 
with  difficulty  collected  from  the  Italian  towns  and  princes.  The 
Netherlands  had  up  to  this  time  been  the  only  trustworthy  source  of 
revenue,  and  the  expenditure  of  Charles'  Court  had  made  great  in- 
roads upon  his  treasury.  Money  was  now  coming  in  to  the  Castilian 
exchequer,  but  these  funds  had  been  pledged  in  advance.  The  Italian 
army  was  a  year  in  arrear.  Ferdinand  was  begging  for  money  for 
measures  against  the  Turks.  The  desperate  appeal  of  Rhodes  for  aid  in 
1522  had  to  pass  unregarded,  and  this  outlying  bulwark  of  Christendom 
capitulated  at  the  close  of  1522.  Although  Charles  was  in  Spain  to 
stimulate  operations,  Fuenterrabia  was  successfully  defended  by  the 
French  against  all  attacks  until  February,  1524. 

On  the  other  hand,  since  the  autumn  of  1522  the  allies  had  been 
counting  on  powerful  aid  in  France  itself.  The  Duke  of  Bourbon,  with 
his  extended  possessions  in  the  centre  of  France,  was  almost  the  only 
remaining  representative  of  the  great  appanaged  princes  of  the  fifteenth 
century.  Although  his  wings  had  been  clipped  by  legislative  and  even 
more  by  administrative  changes,  he  still  commanded  a  princely  revenue 
and  considerable  local  support.  His  position  in  the  kingdom  had 
been  recognised  by  the  gift  of  the  highest  of  Crown  offices,  the  post 
and  dignity  of  Constable  of  France.  But  his  title  to  the  vast  possessions 
which  he  held  was  not  beyond  question.  The  duchy  of  Bourbon  had 
been  preserved  from  reunion  with  the  Crown  under  Louis  XII  by  the  in- 
fluence of  Anne,  Duchess  of  Bourbon,  better  known  as  Anne  of  Beaujeu, 
who  first  procured  for  her  daughter  Susanne  the  right  to  succeed  her 
father  in  the  duchy  (1498),  and  then  (1505)  married  her  to  Count  Charles 
of  Montpensier,  her  cousin,  who  represented  the  rights  of  a  younger 
branch  of  the  Bourbon  House.  By  this  marriage  Charles  of  Montpensier 
was  elevated  to  the  duchy  of  Bourbon,  but  when  his  wife  Susanne  died 
without  issue  in  1521  his  title  became  questionable  at  law.  From 
motives  probably  of  cupidity,  and  of  cupidity  alone,  a  double  claim  was 
now  advanced  against  him.  The  Queen  Mother,  Duchess  of  Angouleme, 
claimed  the  female  fiefs  as  being  more  closely  related  to  the  main  line  of 
the  Bourbon  House,  and  the  King  claimed  the  male  fiefs  as  escheating 
to  the  Crown.  Against  claimants  so  powerful  Charles  of  Bourbon 
felt  himself  unable  to  litigate  before  the  Parliament  of  Paris.  The 
points  of  law  were  nice  and  the  tribunal  amenable  to  royal  influence. 
He  turned  therefore  to  the  enemies  of  his  country.  He  approached 
Charles  V  and  boldly  asked  for  his  sister  Eleonora  (widow  of  the  King 
of  Portugal)  in  marriage,  offering  in  return  to  raise  500  men-at-arms 
and  8000  foot-soldiers  and  to  co-operate  with  an  invasion  from  the  east. 


1523]     Flight  of  the  Constable.  — Invasions  of  France        17 

But  the  intrigues  became  known,  and  although  the  King  hesitated  to 
arrest  his  Constable  when  he  had  him  at  Paris  in  his  power,  and  though 
again  in  August,  1523,  when  the  King  passed  through  Moulins  to  take 
part  in  the  great  expedition  to  Italy,  the  Constable  was  allowed  to  stay 
behind  on  a  plea  of  sickness,  at  length  a  peremptory  summons  was  sent 
ordering  him  to  join  the  King  at  Lyons.  On  this  the  Duke,  who  had 
been  looking  in  vain  for  the  approach  of  aid  from  the  east,  took  to 
flight  and,  after  attempting  to  escape  to  Spain  by  way  of  Roussillon, 
succeeded  at  length  in  reaching  the  frontier  of  Franche-Comte. 

The  elaborate  plans  of  the  allies,  which  included  the  despatch  of 
a  force  of  10,000  Landsknechte  to  Bourbon,  an  invasion  of  Picardy  b}^ 
a  joint  army  of  21,000  men,  and  an  attack  on  Languedoc  with  34,000 
men  from  Spain,  were  thus  defeated.  The  Constable  brought  with  him 
only  his  name  and  his  sword.  But  the  danger  was  judged  sufficiently 
real  to  prevent  Francis  from  leading  his  army  in  person  into  the  Milanese, 
as  had  been  intended.  Great  preparations  had  been  made  for  an 
expedition  on  a  royal  scale,  but  the  Admiral  Bonnivet  was  appointed 
to  take  command  instead  of  the  King.  While  Bonnivet  was  advancing 
on  Italy  some  attempt  was  made  by  the  allies  to  execute  the  other  parts 
of  the  plan.  The  Duke  of  Suffolk  and  the  Count  van  Buren  advanced 
by  Picardy  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Compiegiie  and  Senlis,  the  German 
force  threatened  the  frontier  from  the  side  of  Bresse,  while  a  Spanish 
force  crossed  the  Pyrenees  in  October  and  threatened  Bayonne.  The 
delays  had  shattered  the  effect  of  the  combination,  but  the  kingdom 
was  almost  undefended,  and  even  Paris  was  thought  to  be  insecure.  Yet 
little  came  of  all  these  efforts.  The  Germans  from  Bresse  made  an 
ineffectual  attempt  to  join  with  Suffolk  and  Buren,  but  were  hunted 
back  across  the  frontier  by  the  Count  of  Guise.  The  leaders  of  the 
northern  expedition  showed  little  enterprise,  and  money  as  usual  was 
deficient.  The  Spanish  army  advanced  upon  Bayonne,  but  was  repulsed 
by  the  vigorous  defence  of  Lautrec,  and  retired  ineffective.  In  spite 
of  a  liberal  subsidy  in  August  from  the  Cortes  of  Castile,  and  the 
seizure  in  October  of  gold  coming  on  private  account  from  the 
Indies,  the  great  design  for  the  partition  of  France  proved  entirely 
abortive. 

Meanwhile  Bonnivet  had  pursued  his  path  to  Lombardy.  His  army 
consisted  of  1500  men-at-arms  and  some  25,000  foot,  Swiss,  Germans, 
French,  and  Italians.  On  the  14th  of  September  he  reached  the  Ticino. 
Prospero  Colonna,  who  was  in  command  of  the  imperial  troops,  had  no 
adequate  resources  with  which  to  resist  so  powerful  a  foe  in  the  field. 
Adrian  VI,  it  is  true,  had  recently  announced  his  reluctant  adhesion  to 
the  imperial  party,  and  about  the  same  time  Venice  had  renounced  her 
French  alliance  and  concluded  a  league  with  Charles.  But  the  value 
of  these  accessions  had  not  begun  to  be  felt  when  Adrian's  death 
(September  14)  introduced  uncertainty  afresh  at  the  very  moment  when 


48  Invasion  of  Lomhardy,  and  retreat  [1523-4 

Bonnivet  appeared  in  Italy.  Colonna  was  no  longer  supported  by 
Pescara,  but  he  had  at  his  disposition  Giovanni  de'  Medici,  the  celebrated 
leader  of  the  Black  Italian  Bands,  and  Antonio  de  Leyva.  The  imperial 
leaders  abandoned  the  western  part  of  the  duchy  to  the  French  and 
retired  on  Milan.  If  Bonnivet  had  pressed  on  he  would  have  found  the 
capital  unready  for  defence.  But  his  delay  gave  time  to  improvise 
protection  :  and  when  he  arrived  an  assault  appeared  impracticable.  He 
determined  to  endeavour  to  reduce  the  city  by  famine. 

Besides  Milan,  Colonna  still  held  Pavia,  Lodi,  and  Cremona,  and 
wisely  confined  his  efforts  to  the  retention  of  these  important  posts. 
Bonnivet  divided  his  forces  and  sent  Bayard  to  attack  Lodi  and 
Cremona.  Lodi  fell,  but  Cremona  held  out,  and  Bayard  had  to  be 
recalled.  The  election  of  Clement  VII  on  November  19  gave  for  the 
moment  strength  to  the  imperial  side.  Money  was  sent  and  the  Marquis 
of  Mantua  brought  aid.  Bonnivet  was  forced  to  abandon  the  siege  of 
Milan,  and  retire  upon  the  Ticino.  On  December  28  Prosper©  Colonna 
died,  but  Charles  de  Lannoy,  the  viceroy  of  Naples,  with  the  Marquis  of 
Pescara,  arrived  to  take  his  place,  bringing  with  him  a  small  supply  of 
money  and  troops.  Reinforcements  came  from  Germany,  and  the  Im- 
perialists, now  supported  more  effectively  by  Venice,  were  able  to  take 
the  offensive.  They  drove  Bonnivet  from  Abbiate-Grasso,  then  from 
Vigevano  to  No  vara.  The  reinforcements  which  he  was  eagerly  expecting 
from  the  Grisons  at  length  arrived  at  Chiavenna,  but  found  neither  men 
nor  money  to  meet  them.  Giovanni  de'  Medici  hung  upon  their  flanks 
and  drove  the  Grisons  levies  back  over  the  mountains.  At  length  Bon- 
nivet was  forced  to  leave  Novara  and  endeavourtoeffecta  junction  with 
a  force  of  8000  Swiss,  whom  he  met  upon  the  Sesia.  But  this  relief  was 
too  late.  The  morale  of  the  army  was  destroyed.  The  remnants  could 
only  be  saved  by  retreat.  Bonnivet  himself  was  wounded  at  this 
juncture,  and  the  task  of  conducting  the  wearied  and  dispirited  troops 
across  the  mountains  fell  upon  Bayard.  Bayard  took  command  of  the 
rear-guard,  and,  in  protecting  the  movements  of  his  comrades,  fell 
mortally  wounded  by  the  ball  of  an  arquebus  (April  30,  1521).  With 
him  perished  the  finest  flower  of  the  French  professional  army  in  that  age, 
the  knight  who  had  raised  the  ideal  of  a  warrior's  life  to  the  highest  point. 
But  his  last  task  was  successfully  accomplished.  The  Swiss  effected  their 
retreat  by  Aosta,  the  French  by  Susa  and  Briangon.  The  last  garrison 
of  the  French  in  Lombardy  capitulated. 

Adrian's  successor,  Giulio  de'  Medici,  Clement  VII,  had  been  sup- 
ported in  his  election  by  the  imperial  influence,  in  spite  of  Charles' 
promises  to  Wolsey.  Giulio  had  long  controlled  the  papal  policy 
under  Leo,  and  it  was  assumed  that  he  would  tread  the  same  path.  But 
Clement  had  all  the  defects  of  his  qualities.  Supremely  subtle  and 
acute,  he  had  not  the  constancy  to  follow  up  what  he  had  once  come  to 
regard  as  a  mistake.     He  relied  upon  his  own  ingenuity  and  duplicity, 


1524]  Siege  of  Ma7^seilles  49 

and  endeavoured  to  sail  with  every  wind.  Thus  he  failed  alike  to  serve 
his  own  interests  and  those  of  his  allies. 

Clement  began  almost  at  once  to  detach  himself  from  the  imperial 
alliance,  dangerous  in  defeat,  oppressive  in  the  event  of  success.  His 
efforts  however  to  conclude  a  truce  proved  unsuccessful,  and  on  May  25, 
1524,  a  new  compact  was  accepted  by  the  allies.  The  Duke  of  Bourbon 
was  to  invade  France  at  the  head  of  the  victorious  army  of  Italy.  A 
joint  expedition  w^as  to  invade  Picardy,  and  a  Spanish  army  was  to 
attack  by  way  of  Roussillon.  Henry  VIII  seemed  to  see  a  chance  of 
making  good  the  pretensions  of  his  ancestors  to  the  French  throne,  and 
exacted  from  the  unwilling  Duke  of  Bourbon  an  oath  of  fidelity  to 
himself  as  King  of  France. 

In  July  the  first  point  of  this  agreement  was  carried  into  effect. 
The  Duke  of  Bourbon  crossed  the  Alps  in  company  with  Pescara  and 
invaded  France  (July  1).  His  artillery  joined  him  by  sea  at  Monaco. 
Provence  offered  little  resistance.  The  Duke  entered  Aix  on  August  9. 
But  the  mother  movements  were  delayed,  and  it  was  thought  dangerous 
to  advance  on  Lyons  without  this  support.  Accordingly  it  was  deter- 
mined to  lay  siege  to  Marseilles,  which  was  surrounded  on  August  19. 
Francis  had  here  shown  unusual  foresight,  and  the  town  was  prepared 
for  defence  under  the  command  of  the  Orsini  captain,  Renzo  da  Ceri, 
who  had  shown  himself  throughout  a  passionate  friend  of  France.  The 
breaches  in  the  walls  were  immediately  protected  by  earthworks,  and  the 
besiegers  could  not  venture  an  assault.  The  French  navy,  reinforced 
by  Andrea  Doria  with  his  galleys,  was  superior  to  the  invaders  on 
the  sea.  Meanwhile  Francis  was  collecting  with  great  energy  an  army 
of  relief  at  Avignon.  Unexampled  tallies  were  imposed  ;  the  clergy 
were  taxed,  the  cities  gave  subsidies,  and  the  nobles  forced  loans.  Time 
pressed  and  the  assault  of  Marseilles  was  ordered  for  September  4,  but 
the  troops  recoiled  before  the  danger ;  the  Marquis  of  Pescara,  hostile 
throughout  to  the  enterprise  and  its  leader,  did  not  conceal  his  dis- 
approval ;  and  the  project  was  abandoned.  The  promised  aid  from 
Roussillon  was  not  sent,  and  the  diversion  in  Picardy  was  not  made. 
On  September  29,  much  against  his  will,  the  Duke  of  Bourbon  ordered 
the  retreat.  The  troops,  ill-clothed,  ill-provided,  ill-shod,  made  their 
way  across  the  mountains,  closely  pursued  by  Montmorency.  Francis 
followed  with  his  whole  army  and  reached  Vercelli  on  the  same  day 
that  the  retreating  army  arrived  at  Alba,  about  sixteen  miles  S.S.W. 
of  Asti. 

With  troops  humiliated,  discontented,  exhausted,  resistance  in  the 
field  was  impossible.  The  Imperialists  adopted  the  same  strategy  that 
had  succeeded  so  well  against  Bonnivet.  They  determined  to  hold 
Alessandria,  Pavia,  Lodi,  Pizzighettone,  Cremona.  The  citadel  of  Milan 
was  garrisoned,  and  it  was  hoped  that  the  city  might  be  held ;  but 
it  had  suffered  terribly  from  the  plague,  and  on  the  approach  of  Francis 


50  Campaign  of  Paiia  [i524-5 

with  his  whole  army,  the  attempt  was  given  up.  Bourbon,  Lannoy,  and 
Pescara  retired  to  Lodi  ;  and  the  defence  of  Pavia  was  entrusted  to 
Antonio  de  Leyva.  Instead  of  following  up  the  remnants  of  the  impe- 
rial army  to  Lodi,  and  crushing  them  or  driving  them  east  into  the 
arms  of  their  uncertain  Venetian  allies,  Francis  turned  aside  to  make 
himself  master  of  Pavia.  The  siege  artillery  opened  fire  on  November  6. 
An  early  assault  having  failed,  Francis  attempted  to  divert  the  course  of 
the  Ticino,  and  by  this  means  to  obtain  access  to  the  south  side  of  the 
town,  which  relied  mainly  on  the  protection  of  the  river.  But  the  win- 
ter rains  rendered  the  work  impossible.  Francis  determined  to  reduce 
the  cit}'  by  blockade.  ^Meanwhile  he  called  up  reinforcements  from  the 
Swiss,  and  took  Giovanni  de'  Medici  into  his  pay. 

Italy  prepared  to  take  the  side  which  appeared  for  the  moment 
stronger.  Venice  hesitated  in  her  alliance.  Clement,  while  endeavouring 
to  reassure  the  Emperor  as  to  his  fidelity,  and  ostensibly  negotiating  for 
an  impossible  peace,  concluded,  on  December  12,  1524,  a  secret  treaty 
with  France,  in  which  Florence  and  Venice  were  included.  This  treaty 
led  both  Clement  and  Francis  to  their  ruin.  Clement  paid  for  his 
cowardly  betrayal  at  the  Sack  of  Rome,  and  Francis  was  encouraged 
to  detach  a  part  of  his  army  under  the  Duke  of  Albany  to  invade 
Naples,  an  enterprise  which  weakened  his  main  force  without  securing 
any  corresponding  advantage.  The  Duke,  after  holding  to  ransom  the 
towns  of  Italy  through  which  he  passed,  reached  the  south  of  the  papal 
territory,  where  he  was  attacked  by  the  Colonna  and  driven  back  to 
Rome.  It  was  hoped  however  that  this  diversion  would  induce  the 
imperial  generals  to  leave  Lombardy  to  its  fate  and  hurry  to  the  protec- 
tion of  Naples.  But  reinforcements  were  coming  in  from  Germany 
under  Frundsberg,  and  it  was  Naples  that  was  left  to  fortune.  On 
January  24,  1525,  the  imperial  forces  moved  from  Lodi.  After  a 
feint  on  Milan,  they  approached  Pavia,  and  encamped  towards  the 
east  to  wait  their  opportunity.  Thence  they  succeeded  in  introducing 
powder  and  other  most  necessary  supplies  into  the  famished  city. 
The  seizure  of  Chiavenna  on  behalf  of  Charles  recalled  the  Grisons 
levies  to  the  defence  of  their  own  territory.  Reinforcements  coming 
to  Francis  from  the  Alps  were  cut  off  and  destroyed.  Giovanni  de' 
Medici  was  incapacitated  by  a  wound.  Bnt  the  condition  of  the 
beleaguered  city  and  lack  of  pay  and  provision  did  not  permit  of 
further  delay.  It  was  decided  to  attack  Francis  in  his  camp  and  risk 
the  issue. 

On  the  night  of  February  24-25  the  imperial  army  broke  into  the 
walled  enclosure  of  the  park  of  Mirabello.  Delays  were  caused  by  the 
solid  walls  and  day  broke  before  the  actual  encounter.  The  news  of 
the  attack  induced  Francis  to  leave  his  entrenchments  and  to  muster 
his  army,  which  consisted  of  8000  Swiss,  5000  Germans,  7000  French 
infantrj',  and    6000    Italians.     He  was  not   much  superior  in   actual 


1525-6]        Defeat  of  Francis. —  Treaty  of  Madrid  51 

numbers,  but  stronger  in  artillery  and  cavalry.  An  attempt  of  the 
Imperialists  to  join  bands  with  the  garrison  of  Pavia,  by  marching  past 
the  French  army,  which  had  had  time  to  adopt  a  perfect  order  of  battle 
in  the  park,  proved  impossible  under  a  flanking  artillery  fire.  Nor  was 
it  possible  to  throw  up  earthworks  and  await  assault,  as  Lannoy  had 
hoped.  A  direct  attack  upon  the  French  army  was  necessary.  In  the 
melee  which  ensued  it  is  almost  impossible  to  disentangle  the  several 
causes  of  the  issue,  but  it  seems  clear  that  the  complete  victory  of  the 
Imperialists  was  due  to  the  admirable  fire-discipline  and  tactics  of  the 
veteran  Spanish  arquebusiers,  to  the  attack  of  Antonio  de  Leyva  with 
his  garrison  from  the  rear,  to  an  inopportune  movement  of  the  German 
troops  of  the  French  which  masked  their  artillery  fire,  and  perhaps  in 
some  measure  to  the  cowardly  example  of  flight  set  by  the  Duke  of 
AleuQon.  The  French  army  was  destroyed,  the  French  King  was 
captured,  and  all  his  most  illustrious  commanders  were  taken  prisoners 
or  killed.  As  Ravenna  marks  the  advent  of  artillery  as  a  deciding 
factor  in  great  battles,  so  perhaps  Pavia  may  be  said  to  mark  the 
superiority  attained  by  hand  firearms  over  the  pike.  The  Swiss  pike- 
men  were  unable  to  stand  against  the  Spanish  bullets. 

Once  more  the  duchy  had  been  reconquered,  and  it  seemed  lost  for 
ever  to  France.  Francis  was  sent  as  a  prisoner  first  to  Pizzighettone 
and  then  to  Spain.  Here  the  unwonted  restraint  acting  on  a  man  so 
passionately  devoted  to  field-sports  shook  his  health  ;  he  thought  at  one 
time  of  resigning  the  crown  of  France  in  favour  of  the  Dauphin,  in 
order  to  discount  the  advantage  possessed  by  Charles  in  the  custody  of 
his  royal  person ;  but  he  was  at  length  constrained  to  accept  the 
Emperor's  terms.  The  result  was  the  treaty  of  Madrid,  signed  by 
Francis  on  January  14,  1526,  and  confirmed  by  the  most  solemn 
oaths,  and  by  the  pledge  of  the  King's  knightly  honour,  but  with  the 
deliberate  and  secretly  expressed  intention  of  repudiating  its  obligations. 
Francis  was  to  marry  Eleonora,  the  Emperor's  sister  and  the  widow  of 
the  King  of  Portugal.  He  renounced  all  his  rights  over  Milan,  Naples, 
Genoa,  Asti,  together  vni\\  the  suzerainty  of  Flanders,  Artois,  and 
Tournay.  He  ceded  to  Charles  the  duchy  of  Burgundy,  in  which  how- 
ever the  traditional  dependencies  of  the  duchy  were  not  included.  The 
Duke  of  Bourbon  was  to  be  pardoned  and  restored  to  his  hereditary 
possessions.  Francis  abandoned  the  Duke  of  Gelders,  and  gave  up  all 
claims  of  d'Albret  to  Navarre.  As  a  guarantee  for  the  execution  of 
the  treaty  the  King's  two  eldest  sons  were  to  be  surrendered  to  the 
Emperor's  keeping  ;  and  Francis  was  to  return  as  a  prisoner  in  the 
event  of  non-fulfilment. 

In  spite  of  the  outcries  of  historians,  the  terms  of  this  treaty  must 
be  regarded  as  moderate.  Charles  exacted  nothing,  after  his  extra- 
ordinary success,  except  what  he  must  have  considered  to  be  his  own  by 
right.     But  how  far  his  moderation  was  dictated  by  policy,  and  how  far 


52  Conspiracy  of  Morone. — League  of  Cognac     [i525-6 

by  natural  feelings  of  justice,  may  remain  undecided.  The  Duke  of 
Bourbon  and  Henry  VIII  had  pressed  upon  him  the  pursuit  of  the  war, 
the  invasion  and  dismemberment  of  France.  Had  Charles  really  aimed 
at  European  supremacy  this  course  was  open  to  him.  But  he  did  not 
take  it,  whether  from  a  prudent  distrust  of  his  English  ally,  or  from  an 
honest  dislike  for  unjust  and  perilous  schemes  of  aggrandisement.  That  he 
took  no  pains  to  use  his  own  victory  for  the  furtherance  of  the  ends  of 
England,  may  appear  at  first  sight  surprising.  But  Henry  VIII  had 
had  no  part  in  the  victory  of  Pavia,  and  almost  none  in  any  of  Charles' 
successes.  English  subsidies  had  been  a  factor,  though  not  a  decisive 
factor,  in  the  war,  but  English  armed  assistance  had  been  uniformly 
ineffective.  Even  before  the  battle  of  Pavia  Charles  had  known  of 
Henry's  contemplated  change  of  side.  Moreover,  since  the  rejection  of 
Henry's  plans  for  the  dismemberment  of  France,  the  English  King  had 
concluded  an  alliance  with  Louise  of  Savoy,  the  regent  of  Prance,  and 
profited  by  his  desertion  to  the  extent  of  two  millions  of  crowns.  Charles 
owed  nothing  to  Henry  at  the  time  of  the  treaty  of  Madrid. 

Other  considerations  of  a  politic  nature  may  have  inclined  Charles 
to  moderation.  The  Pope, -appalled  by  the  disaster  of  Pavia,  had  been 
preparing  against  the  Emperor  an  Italian  league.  Francesco  Sforza 
had  been  approached  and  had  lent  an  ear  to  proposals  of  infidelity. 
Venice  was  secured.  Even  Pescara,  Charles'  own  servant,  had  been 
sounded  by  Girolamo  Morone,  the  Chancellor  of  Milan,  with  the  offer 
of  the  Kingdom  of  Naples.  Pescara  was  discontented  with  the  favour 
and  good  fortune  of  Lannoy,  with  his  own  position,  the  conditions  of 
his  service,  and  his  rewards.  He  seems  to  have  hesitated  for  a  moment, 
but  eventually  disclosed  all  to  Charles,  and  threw  Morone  into  prison 
(July — October,  1525).  Sforza  was  deprived  of  the  chief  places  in  the 
Milanese,  retaining  only  the  citadels  of  Milan  and  Cremona  ;  but  all  this 
meant  further  trouble  in  Italy,  and  pointed  to  an  understanding  with 
France,  although  Mercurino  Gattinara  throughout  had  urged  that  no 
reliance  should  be  placed  on  French  promises.  Charles  deserves  credit 
for  his  prudence,  if  not  for  his  generosity.  The  notion  that  Francis' 
permanent  friendship  could  have  been  v/on  by  any  greater  liberalit}''  can 
be  at  once  dismissed. 

Francis  I  was  liberated  at  the  French  frontier  on  March  17,  1526, 
leaving  his  two  little  sons  in  his  place.  He  at  once  made  known  his  in- 
tentions by  delaying  and  finally  refusing  the  ratification  of  the  treaty  of 
Madrid  ;  and  on  May  22,  at  Cognac,  a  League  was  concluded  against  the 
Emperor,  in  which  Francesco  Sforza,  the  Pope,  Florence,  and  Venice 
joined  with  France.  Sforza  was  to  receive  the  duchy  of  Milan  unim- 
paired, the  States  of  Italy  were  to  be  restored  to  all  their  rights,  and 
the  French  Princes  were  to  be  released  for  a  ransom  of  2,000,000  crowns. 
Henry  VIII  gave  fair  words  and  encouragement  in  abundance,  but  did 
not  join  the  League.     The  aid  of  France  was  equally  illusory.     The 


1526]  Clement  VII  and  the  Colonna  53 

allies  talked  of  peace,  but  in  reality  they  courted  war,  and  with  it 
all  the  disasters  which  followed. 

The  adhesion,  however  vacillating,  of  Henry  VIII  to  the  party  of 
his  enemies,  set  Charles  free  from  any  obligations  towards  Mary  of 
England,  and  in  March,  1526,  he  concluded  his  marriage  with  Isabella 
of  Portugal,  a  union  which  he  had  long  desired,  securing  to  him  an 
ample  dowry,  and  promising  peace  between  the  two  Iberian  kingdoms. 
The  affairs  of  Italy  still  occupied  his  attention.  Francesco  Sforza 
received  the  first  blow.  Pescara  was  dead,  but  Charles  still  had  able  and 
devoted  servants  in  Italy.  With  the  troops  at  their  disposal  Antonio 
de  Leyva  and  Alfonso  del  Guasto  besieged  Francesco  Sforza  in  the 
citadel  of  Milan.  After  the  League  of  Cognac  had  been  concluded 
the  allies  advanced  to  his  relief.  The  imperialists  were  in  piteous 
case.  Left  without  means  of  support,  they  were  obliged  to  live  upon 
the  country  and  to  levy  money  from  the  citizens  of  Milan.  In  conse- 
quence they  had  to  deal  with  an  actual  revolt  of  the  inhabitants  which 
was  with  difficulty  repressed,  while  the  siege  of  the  citadel  was  still  vigor- 
ously maintained.  Francesco  Maria,  Duke  of  Urbino,  moving  deliberately 
and  cautiously  at  the  head  of  the  united  Venetian  and  papal  army,  after 
seizing  Lodi,  advanced  to  the  relief  of  Sforza,  and  was  only  at  a  short 
distance  from  the  town  when  the  Duke  of  Bourbon  opportunely  arrived 
with  a  small  force  (July  5).  Bourbon  had  been  named  as  Duke  of 
Milan  to  compensate  him  for  the  loss  of  his  French  possessions  which 
Francis  had  refused  to  restore.  The  Duke  of  Urbino  then  commenced 
an  attack,  which  if  vigorously  pushed  might  have  resulted  in  the  de- 
struction of  the  imperialist  forces,  between  the  invaders  and  the  citadel, 
and  among  a  hostile  population.  But  he  showed  neither  resolution 
nor  activity,  and  on  July  25  the  citadel  surrendered.  The  Duke  of 
Urbino,  now  reinforced  by  some  six  thousand  Swiss,  the  only  aid  which 
Francis  supplied,  turned  to  the  siege  of  Cremona,  in  which  he  consumed 
his  resources  and  two  months  of  valuable  time.  The  final  capture  of 
the  city  (September  23)  was  an  inadequate  compensation. 

The  attitude  of  Charles  towards  Clement  VII  at  this  juncture  was 
expressed  in  his  letter  of  September  17,  1526,  in  which  the  misdeeds  of 
the  Pope  were  systematically  set  forth.  This  letter  was  afterwards 
printed  in  Spain,  Germany,  and  the  Netherlands  as  a  manifesto  to  all 
Christendom.  The  arraignment  was  severe  but  not  on  the  whole  unjust. 
In  view  of  his  wrongs,  real  and  supposed,  the  means  used  by  the  Emperor 
are  not  surprising.  His  emissary,  Ugo  de  Moncada,  after  vainly  en- 
deavouring to  win  back  Clement,  had  turned  to  the  still  powerful  family 
of  Colonna.  These  nobles,  Ghibellines  by  tradition,  soldiers  by  pro- 
fession, and  raiders  by  inclination,  after  terrifying  the  Pope  by  forays  in 
the  south  and  by  the  capture  of  Anagni,  concluded  with  him  a  treacherous 
peace  (August  22).  The  Pope,  already  overburdened  by  his  efforts  in 
the  north,  was  thus  induced  to  disarm  at  home,  and  on  September  20 


54  Inaction  of  the  Duke  of  Urhino  [1526-7 

the  Coloniia  struck  at  Rome.  They  penetrated  first  into  the  southern 
part  of  the  town,  and  then  into  the  Leonine  city,  where  they  sacked  tlie 
papal  pahice,  and  the  dwellings  of  several  Cardinals.  Clement  took 
refuge  in  the  Castle  of  St  Angelo,  where  he  was  shortly  forced  to  con- 
clude a  truce  of  four  months  with  the  Emperor,  promising  to  withdraw 
his  troops  from  Lombardy  and  his  galleys  from  before  Genoa,  and  giving 
hostages  for  his  good  faith.  The  Emperor  disavowed  the  actions  of  the 
allies  but  profited  by  the  result,  which  was  indeed  only  partial,  since 
Giovanni  de'  Medici,  with  the  best  of  the  papal  troops,  continued  to 
fight  for  the  League,  in  the  name  of  the  King  of  France.  An  amnesty 
promised  to  the  Colonna  was  disregarded,  and  in  full  Consistory  their 
lands  were  declared  to  be  confiscated,  and  a  force  was  sent  to  execute 
this  sentence. 

Inert  as  ever,  after  the  capture  of  Cremona,  the  Duke  of  Urbino 
allowed  three  weeks  to  pass  before,  strengthened  by  the  arrival  of  4000 
French,  he  moved  upon  Milan,  not  to  assault  but  to  blockade.  These 
delays  were  invaluable  to  Charles.  They  allowed  him  to  win  the  adhesion 
of  Alfonso,  Duke  of  Ferrara,  which  was  facilitated  by  the  papal  hostility. 
They  allowed  him  to  send  troops  from  Spain  to  Naples  (December), 
and  to  collect  German  levies,  who  arrived  in  Italy  under  Frundsberg  in 
November.  Their  presence  in  the  duchy  of  Mantua  forced  the  Duke  of 
Urbino  to  abandon  the  siege  of  Milan.  He  divided  his  army,  leaving  a 
part  at  Vauri,  on  the  Adda,  and  advanced  with  the  remainder  against 
Frundsberg,  whom  he  found  at  Borgoforte  near  the  Po.  In  the  skii-mish 
which  followed  Giovanni  de'  Medici  was  wounded,  and  he  died  shortly 
afterwards  at  Mantua.  The  Duke  of  Urbino  gave  up  all  further 
attempt  to  prevent  the  junction  of  the  imperialists,  and  returned  to 
Mantua.  The  want  of  energy  displayed  by  the  Duke  of  Urbino 
throughout  this  campaign  is  not  wholly  to  be  attributed  to  his  character. 
He  had  a  well-grounded  mistrust  of  tlie  troops  of  which  his  army  was 
composed,  and  doubted  their  competence  to  face  the  Spaniards.  More- 
over the  Venetians  were  uncertain  as  to  the  Pope's  real  intentions  and 
were  reluctant  to  push  matters  to  an  extreme.  The  success  of  Charles 
however  was  principally  due  to  this  policy  of  inaction.  The  Duke 
of  Bourbon  now  extorted  by  the  extremest  measures  the  money  neces- 
sary to  enable  him  to  move,  requiring,  for  instance,  20,000  ducats  of 
Morone  as  the  price  of  his  life  and  pardon,  and  at  length  the  forces  met 
at  Fiorenzuola  in  the  territory  of  Piacenza  (February,  1527).  The 
united  army  then  moved  towards  the  Papal  States,  watched  at  a  distance 
by  the  Duke  of  Urbino,  while  garrisons  were  sent  to  save  Bologna  and 
Piacenza.  The  Pope,  in  extreme  alarm,  threatened  by  Bourbon  from 
the  north  and  Lannoy  with  the  Colonna  from  the  south,  implored  Francis 
to  act,  and  showed  himself  willing  to  make  whatever  terms  he  could  with 
the  Emperor.  Then  on  hearing  of  a  small  success  of  his  troops  in  the 
south  at  Frosinone  (January,  1527),  he  determined  to  pursue  the  war. 


1527]  The  Sack  of  Rome  55 

A  sudden  raid  by  Kenzo  da  Ceri  on  the  Abruzzi  seemed  at  first  to 
promise  a  welcome  diversion,  but  very  soon  the  invasions  of  Naples 
proved  as  unprofitable  as  the  campaigns  in  the  north.  The  project  of 
conferring  the  kingdom  on  Louis,  Count  of  Vaudemont,  the  brother  of 
the  Duke  of  Lorraine,  which  Clement  had  put  forward,  faded  into 
the  visionary.  The  Pope  shifted  his  ground  again,  and  on  March  15 
concluded  a  truce  of  eight  months  for  himself  and  Florence. 

Meanwhile  the  imperial  army  had  been  long  inactive  at  San  Gio- 
vanni, N.W.  of  Bologna.  Destitute  of  everything,  it  was  not  likely 
that  they  would  accept  a  truce  which  brought  them  only  60,000  ducats. 
A  meeting  had  in  fact  already  taken  place,  and  Frundsberg,  while 
endeavouring  to  pacify  his  La7idshiechte,  was  struck  by  apoplexy ;  his 
days  of  activity  were  over.  Hereupon  came  the  news  of  the  truce,  with 
its  impossible  proposals,  prolonging  the  intolerable  condition  of  inaction 
and  want.  The  army  clamoured  to  go  forward  and  Bourbon  decided  to 
lead  them.  The  Count  del  Guasto,  Pescara's  nephew,  whose  Italian 
patriotism  always  competed  with  his  duty  to  his  master,  protested  and 
withdrew,  but  on  March  30  the  others  set  forth,  scantily  provided  with 
transport  and  provisions  by  the  Duke  of  Ferrara.  Clement,  on  the  con- 
clusion of  the  truce,  had  disbanded  his  troops,  and  while  Lannoy  was 
endeavouring  on  his  behalf  to  raise  the  money  at  Florence  to  appease 
the  imperialists,  the  tumultuous  advance  continued.  On  April  21 
Lannoy  met  Bourbon  with  100,000  ducats,  but  he  now  demanded  more 
than  twice  that  sum,  and  the  march  proceeded  down  the  valley  of  the 
Arno,  threatening  Florence.  But  the  army  of  the  League  was  near 
enough  to  protect  that  city,  and  the  only  result  was  a  futile  rising  of  the 
citizens,  and  the  accession  of  Florence  to  the  League.  Bourbon  then 
determined  to  move  on  Rome,  a  resolution  acceptable  above  all  to  his 
Lutheran  followers.  'The  Pope  proclaimed^  his  adhesion  to  the  con- 
federates, and  clamoured  for  aid.  But  it  was  too  late.  On  May  5  the 
mutinous  army  appeared  before  Rome  on  the  Monte  Mario.  They  had 
left  their  artillery  on  the  road,  but  the  city  was  almost  undefended, 
except  for  such  measures  as  Renzo  da  Ceri  had  been  able  to  take  on 
orders  given  at  the  last  moment.  The  next  day  the  Leonine  city  was 
assaulted  and  captured,  the  Duke  of  Bourbon  being  killed  at  the 
moment  of  escalading  the  wall.  Philibert,  Prince  of  Orange,  took  the 
command.     Clement  had  only  just  time  to  seek  refuge  in  St  Angelo. 

In  the  main  city  Renzo  da  Ceri  endeavoured  to  persuade  the  Romans 
to  protect  themselves  by  breaking  down  the  bridges,  and  preventing  the 
entry  of  the  Colonna  from  the  south.  But  he  failed.  The  Trastevere 
was  easily  captured,  and  the  imperialists  advanced  without  opposition 
across  the  bridge  of  Sixtus.  For  eight  days  the  Sack  continued,  among 
horrors  almost  unexampled  in  the  history  of  war.  The  Lutherans  re- 
joiced to  burn  and  to  defile  what  all  the  world  had  adored.  Churches  were 
desecrated,  women,  even  the  religious,  violated,  ambassadors  pillaged, 


56  Consequences  of  the  Sack  of  Borne  [i527 

cardinals  put  to  ransom,  ecclesiastical  dignitaries  and  ceremonies  made 
a  mockery,  and  the  soldiers  fought  among  themselves  for  the  spoil. 
The  population  of  Rome  had  been  much  reduced  by  the  plague  of  1522, 
and  a  rough  census  taken  shortly  before  the  capture  gives  the  number 
as  about  55,000,  of  whom  4000  are  estimated  to  have  perished  in  the 
Sack.  All  who  were  able  took  to  flight,  and  the  deserted  city  was  left 
to  the  soldiers. 

The  Duke  of  Urbino  came  and  looked  at  the  city  from  without,  but 
decided  to  do  nothing,  though  the  disorder  of  the  imperial  troops  gave 
good  hopes  for  an  attack,  and  the  Pope  at  least  might  have  been  rescued. 
In  default  of  all  aid  Clement  made  terms :  the  payment  of  400,000 
ducats,  and  the  surrender  of  Ostia,  Civita  Vecchia,  Piacenza,  and  Modena 
being  stipulated.  The  Pope  was  closely  guarded  in  the  Castle  of  St 
Angelo.  While  he  was  helpless  there  the  Imperialists  occupied  Ostia 
and  Civita  Vecchia,  but  were  not  able  to  obtain  possession  of  the  other 
places.  The  Duke  of  Ferrara  seized  Modena  and  Reggio  :  the  Venetians, 
in  spite  of  their  alliance,  Ravenna  and  Cervia.  The  Papal  State  was 
crumbling.  From  Florence  also  the  Medici  nephews  were  expelled  with 
their  guardian,  the  Cardinal  of  Cortona.  A  Republic  was  established, 
though  the  city  still  adhered  to  the  League.  Meanwhile  in  Rome  the 
Prince  of  Orange  had  been  forced  to  relinquish  his  command,  and 
Lannoy,  who  took  his  place  soon  afterwards,  died  of  the  plague,  which 
was  raging  in  the  army.  For  nine  months  the  city  and  its  neighbour- 
hood were  at  the  mercy  of  the  lawless  and  leaderless  troops. 

The  responsibility  of  Charles  for  the  Sack  of  Rome  cannot  be  accu- 
rately weighed.  That  he  who  wills  the  act  wills  also  the  consequences 
of  the  act  is  a  principle  that  applies  to  both  sides.  Charles  willed  the  ad- 
vance of  Bourbon  and  the  armed  coercion  of  the  Pope  ;  he  willed  that  the 
Pope  should  be  deceived  by  truces,  which  he  did  not  intend  to  honour. 
He  could  not  foresee  that  Bourbon's  army  would  have  been  completely 
out  of  control,  but  sooner  or  later  such  must  have  been  the  case  with 
these  Italian  armies,  among  whom  destitution  was  chronic.  On  the 
other  hand,  Clement  brought  his  fate  upon  himself.  He  who  observes 
faith  with  none  cannot  expect  that  faith  will  be  observed  with  him. 
He  who  takes  the  sword  must  accept  what  the  sword  brings.  And 
although  an  honourable  motive,  the  desire  to  liberate  Italy,  and  a 
natural  motive,  the  desire  to  preserve  the  real  independence  of  Florence 
and  the  papal  power,  may  have  partly  influenced  his  actions,  it  is 
impossible  to  acquit  Clement  of  a  desire  for  personal  and  iDontifical 
aggrandisement,  Avhile  in  the  use  of  means  for  the  accomplishment  of 
these  ends  he  showed  neither  rectitude  nor  practical  wisdom.  Even  in 
his  own  game  of  Italian  duplicity  he  allowed  himself  to  be  outwitted. 

The  Pope  and  the  Papacy  were  crushed  into  the  dust,  but  the 
struggle  was  not  yet  over.  Before  the  Sack  of  Rome,  Henry  VIII  and 
Francis  had  concluded  a  new  and  offensive  alliance  at  Westminster 


1527-8]  Invasion  of  Italy  by  Lautrec  57 

(April  30,  1527) ;  and  after  the  news  had  spread  through  Europe  this 
was  confirmed  on  May  29,  and  strengthened  still  further  by  the  interview 
of  Amiens  (August  4).  One  more  great  effort  was  to  be  made  in  Italy 
to  force  the  Emperor  to  accept  two  million  crowns  in  lieu  of  Burgundy, 
and  to  release  the  sons  of  the  French  King.  The  King  of  England  was 
to  give  support  with  money  and  with  men.  His  zeal  was  quickened 
by  a  desire  to  liberate  the  Pope  from  imperial  control,  and  to  bring 
influence  to  bear  on  him  for  the  divorce  of  Catharine. 

In  July  Lautrec  set  forth  once  more  from  Lyons  for  the  IMilanese 
with  an  army  of  20,000  foot  and  900  men-at-arms,  to  which  Italian 
additions  were  expected.  Advancing  by  the  usual  route  of  Susa,  he 
easily  made  himself  master  of  the  western  districts,  including  Ales- 
sandria, and  took  Pavia  by  assault.  Andrea  Doria,  the  great  Genoese 
sea-captain,  who  was  in  himself  almost  a  European  Power,  came  again 
into  the  King's  service,  leaving  the  Pope,  and  by  his  aid  the  Imperialist 
Adorni  were  driven  from  Genoa,  and  the  Fregoso  party  set  up  in  their 
place.  Teodoro  Trivulzio  was  appointed  to  govern  the  city  for  France. 
Francesco  Sforza  was  re-established  in  the  chief  part  of  the  Milanese. 
Milan  alone  under  Leyva  resisted. 

But  without  completing  the  conquest  of  the  duchy,  Lautrec  determined 
to  go  south  to  deliver  the  Pope.  Prospects  were  favourable,  for  Ferrara 
had  changed  sides  again,  and  Federigo  da  Gonzaga,  Duke  of  Mantua, 
abandoning  hispolicy  of  neutrality,  joined  the  League.  But  while  Lautrec 
was  still  approaching,  the  Pope  was  forced  on  November  26  to  accept  the 
Emperor's  terms,  which,  except  for  the  promise  to  convoke  a  General 
Council  to  deal  with  the  Lutheran  heresy,  chiefly  concerned  the  payment 
of  money,  and  the  grant  of  ecclesiastical  privileges  of  pecuniary  value  ; 
but  provided  against  future  hostility  by  the  guarantee  of  Ostia,  Civita 
Vecchia,  and  Citta  Castellana,  and  the  surrender  of  notable  Cardinals  as 
hostages.  Indeed  the  Pope,  though  unlikely  to  turn  again  to  Francis, 
who  had  deserted  him  in  his  need,  expelled  his  family  from  Florence,  and 
was  now  allied  with  the  Duke  of  Ferrara.  Before  the  day  appointed  for 
his  release  the  Pope  was  allowed  to  escape  to  Orvieto  (December  6),  his 
original  hostages  having  been  also  liberated  by  the  intervention  of  the 
Cardinal  Pompeo  Colonna.  He  at  once  set  his  influence  to  work  to 
establish  a  permanent  peace.  Both  monarchs  were  prepared  for  peace, 
but  the  terms  were  difficult  to  arrange.  In  view  of  the  great  expenditure 
required,  whether  for  the  ransom  of  Burgundy,  or  for  the  alternative  of 
war,  Francis  called  together  an  assembly  of  Notables  (December  16, 1527) 
to  justify  the  levy  of  an  extraordinary  imposition.  The  Church  offered 
1,300,000  livres,  nobles  promised  unlimited  aid,  an  offer  which  they  after- 
wards unwillingly  and  grudgingly  translated  into  prose  ;  and  those  who 
spoke  for  the  towns  guaranteed  1,200,000  crowns. 

But  the  terms  which  were  offered  to  Charles  were  rejected  by  him  in 
January,  1528,  and  war  was  solemnly  declared  on  behalf  of  France  and 


58  Siege  of  Naples.     Defection  of  Doria  [i528 

England.  Charles  in  reply  reproached  Francis  with  having  cowardly 
broken  his  knightly  word,  and  offered  to  sustain  his  contention  with  his 
body.  Francis  took  up  the  challenge,  and  asked  that  time  and  place 
should  be  named.  But  for  one  reason  or  another,  this  fantastic  and 
frivolous  proposal  never  came  to  its  accomplishment,  and  it  may  be 
doubted  if  either  monarch  desired  to  be  taken  at  his  word. 

Lautrec  was  at  Bologna  when  he  heard  of  the  liberation  of  the  Pope, 
and  he  continued  his  march  through  the  Romagna,  favoured  by  the 
secret  friendship  of  Clement.  Thence  he  penetrated  through  the 
Abruzzi  and  advanced  upon  Apulia.  This  move  drew  the  imperial 
army  out  of  Rome,  February  17,  1528,  which  they  had  sacked  once 
more,  and  left  deserted.  Of  the  forces  which  had  sacked  Rome  some 
11,000  were  left;  the  Prince  of  Orange  had  resumed  the  command,  and 
taken  up  his  position  at  Troja  to  protect  Naples.  Lautrec  refused  to 
attack  him  in  this  strong  position,  professing  to  be  waiting  for  reinforce- 
ments, but  when  the  Florentine  troops  arrived,  the  Prince  of  Orange 
retired  towards  Naples.  Meanwhile  the  Venetians,  as  in  previous  wars, 
occupied  the  cities  on  the  Adriatic  seaboard.  The  Prince  saw  that  the 
utmost  he  could  accomplish  was  to  save  Naples.  But  it  was  with 
difficulty  that  he  could  collect  sufficient  provisions  for  the  immediate 
needs  of  the  troops  and  city,  while  Filippino  Doria,  cruising  off  the 
coast,  intercepted  suf)plies  from  Sicily.  An  attempt  made  by  Moncada 
to  surprise  and  crush  the  Genoese  commander  ended  in  disaster,  with 
the  loss  of  four  galleys,  the  death  of  Moncada  and  of  other  captains 
(April  28,  1528),  and  almost  immediately  afterwards  Lautrec  appeared 
before  the  walls.  Naples  was  now  completely  blockaded  by  the  Genoese 
fleet,  soon  reinforced  by  the  Venetians,  while  Lautrec  established  a  siege 
on  land.  jNIeanwhile  Henry  the  younger,  Duke  of  Brunswick,  crossed  the 
Alps  with  a  German  force,  and  on  June  9  joined  Leyva  on  the  Adda, 
unopposed  by  the  Duke  of  Urbino  ;  but  instead  of  marching  to  Naples, 
Leyva  at  once  proceeded  to  the  reconquest  of  the  duchy,  a  part  of  which, 
including  Pavia,  he  had  previously  recovered,  and  Lodi  was  besieged. 
But  the  country  was  bare  of  all  sustenance,  and  even  when  bills  arrived 
there  was  no  one  to  cash  them:  so  after  three  weeks  the  Germans  refused 
to  continue  the  thankless  task,  and  the  chief  part  of  them  went  home. 
The  imperial  government  in  Milan  about  this  time  was  reduced  to  such 
straits  that  they  were  driven  to  impose  a  ruinous  tax  on  bread  to  meet 
their  most  necessary  expenses.  French  reinforcements  were  collecting  at 
Asti  under  the  Count  of  Saint  Pol.  Never  liad  the  prospects  of  Spain 
in  the  Peninsula  looked  so  black.  Suddenly,  July  4,  orders  came  to 
Filippino  Doria  from  his  uncle  Andrea,  to  withdraw  his  blockading 
force  from  Naples. 

Francis  had  made  the  great  mistake  of  offending  the  powerful  sea- 
captain.  In  addition  to  private  slights,  Andrea  Doria  was  incensed  at  the 
apparent  intention  of  Francis  to  develop  Savona  for  war  and  commerce 


1528-9 


Peace  of  Cambray  59 


at  the  expense  of  Genoa,  and,  when  he  expostulated  with  the  King, 
Francis  formed  the  dangerous  design  of  arresting  the  captain  in  his  own 
city,  and  put  a  French  commander,  without  experience,  Barbesieux,  over 
his  head.  Charles  saw  his  opportunity  and,  by  the  advice  of  the  Prince 
of  Orange,  he  won  Doria  for  his  own  service,  on  favourable  terms  of 
engagement,  and  with  the  promise  of  liberty  for  Genoa  under  imperial 
protection.  In  vain,  when  Francis  learnt  his  danger,  he  conceded  too 
late  everything  that  Doria  had  asked.  The  Admiral's  suspicion  and 
resentment  had  been  aroused,  and  he  joined  the  Emperor  once  and 
for  all. 

This  defection  changed  the  whole  position  of  affairs.  While  the 
French  camp  before  Naples  was  ravaged  by  the  plague,  abundance  suc- 
ceeded to  famine  in  the  city.  The  French  fleet  under  Barbesieux  arrived 
on  July  17  bringing  a  few  men,  but  little  real  assistance.  Lautrec  clung 
desperately  to  his  siege,  and  endeavoured  to  collect  fresh  troops.  The 
besieged  became  more  and  more  audacious  in  their  attacks  ;  Doria 
appeared  at  Naples  with  his  galleys  ;  and,  when  on  August  16  Lautrec 
died,  the  situation  was  hopeless.  On  August  28  the  remnants  under 
the  Marquis  of  Saluzzo  retired  to  Aversa,  where  they  were  obliged  to 
capitulate  shortly  after.  On  September  12  Doria  entered  Genoa,  and 
established  a  new  oligarchical  Republic,  the  French  taking  refuge  in  the 
Castelletto.  The  form  of  government  then  set  up  persisted,  with  some 
modification  in  1576,  until  1796,  and  Genoa  had  internal  peace  at  last. 
In  the  North  Pavia  had  been  retaken  by  Saint  Pol.  The  French  com- 
mander made  an  effort  to  recover  Genoa,  but  without  success.  The 
Genoese  soon  after  occupied  Savona,  and  the  Castelletto  surrendered 
(October  28).  Finally  in  the  spring  of  1529  the  combined  armies  of 
Saint  Pol  and  the  Duke  of  Urbino  determined  to  reduce  Milan,  not  by 
a  siege,  but  by  a  combination  of  posts  of  observation.  This  plan, 
unpromising  enough  in  itself,  was  frustrated  by  the  conduct  of  Saint 
Pol,  who  attempted  to  surprise  Genoa,  but  allowed  himself  to  be  waylaid 
and  defeated  on  his  march  by  Leyva  at  Landriano  (June  20). 

Francis  and  his  allies  still  held  some  places  in  the  Milanese,  and 
some  outlying  posts  in  the  kingdom,  as  well  as  the  cities  of  the  Adriatic 
littoral.  But  negotiations  begun  in  the  winter  between  Louise  of  Savoy 
and  Margaret,  the  ruler  of  the  Netherlands,  had  resulted  in  a  project  of 
peace,  which  was  vehemently  desired  in  the  interests  of  all  countries,  but 
especially  of  the  Netherlands,  where  public  opinion  made  itself  perhaps 
most  felt.  Charles  was  meditating  a  great  expedition  to  Italy  under  his 
personal  command,  but  he  consented  to  treat.  He  sent  full  powers  and 
instructions,  elastic  though  precise,  to  Margaret,  who  was  visited  by  the 
King's  mother,  Louise,  at  Cambray,  July  5.  Here  the  terms  of  peace 
were  definitely  concluded,  and  the  treaty  was  signed  on  August  3, 1529. 
The  compact  of  marriage  between  Francis  and  Eleonora  was  renewed. 
Francis  resigned  all  pretensions  to  Italy,  left  his  allies  in  the  lurch, 


60  Conference  of  Bologna  [1529-30 

renounced  his  suzerainty  over  Flanders  and  Artois,  and  all  the  frontier 
places  on  the  north-east  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  occupant.  Robert 
de  la  Marck  and  the  Duke  of  Gelders  were  abandoned.  Two  millions 
of  crowns  were  to  be  paid  as  ransom  for  the  young  French  princes,  and 
in  lieu  of  the  present  cession  of  Burgundy,  to  which  Charles  reserved 
his  right  ;  while  the  jDossessions  of  Bourbon  and  of  the  Prince  of 
Orange  were  left  to  the  French  King. 

With  this  treaty  the  first  stage  in  the  settlement  of  the  affairs  of 
Western  Europe  was  reached.  To  Spain  was  surrendered  the  un- 
questioned supremacy  in  Italy,  while  the  territory  of  France  remained 
practically  undiminished.  The  agreement  seemed  stable.  Both  Powers 
were  thoroughly  tired  of  war.  The  minor  Italian  potentates  had  begun 
to  learn  that  nothing  could  be  gained  by  war  except  a  change  of 
masters,  accompanied  by  devastation,  exaction,  plague,  and  famine. 
The  Pope  had  made  his  choice  at  last.  The  influence  of  Giberti,  which 
had  always  been  on  the  French  side,  was  removed.  The  moderation 
which  Charles  showed  in  the  use  of  his  success  confirmed  them  in  this 
frame  of  mind.  It  was  his  i^olicy,  while  changing  as  little  as  possible  in 
the  government  of  the  smaller  States,  to  make  such  order  as  should 
secure  to  him  in  each  effective  supervision  and  control. 

The  expedition  which  Charles  had  prepared  for  war  in  Italy  set 
forth  from  Barcelona,  after  a  treaty  had  been  concluded  with  the  Pope 
(June  29),  and  in  the  hope  of  peace  from  the  negotiations  at  Cambray. 
Charles  may  have  received  the  news  of  peace  on  his  arrival  at  Genoa, 
August  12.  With  the  troops  that  he  brought  with  him,  with  the 
victorious  force  from  Naples,  the  army  of  Leyva,  and  fresh  German 
levies  from  the  Tyrol,  he  was  absolute  master  of  Italy,  and  could  shape 
it  at  his  will.  His  dispositions  were  made  at  Bologna,  whither  Clement 
came  to  confer  on  him  the  imperial  crown. 

Peace  was  made  with  Venice,  who  restored  all  her  conquests  and 
paid  a  war  indemnity.  Francesco  Sforza  was  restored  to  Milan  :  but 
Charles  reserved  the  right  to  garrison  the  citadel  of  Milan,  and  the  town 
of  Como,  and  a  Spanish  force  was  left  in  the  Duchy.  Florence  was 
restored  to  the  Medici,  an  operation  which  required  a  ten  months'  siege 
(October,  1529 — August,  1530).  Alessandro  de'  Medici  was  appointed 
as  head  of  the  government  of  the  city  by  the  decree  of  October  28,  1530. 
The  claim  of  the  Duke  of  Ferrara  to  Reggio  and  Modena  was  reserved 
for  the  future  decision  of  Charles.  In  all  other  respects  the  Pope  was 
restored  to  his  full  rights,  and  re-entered  on  the  possession  of  his 
temporal  power,  though  his  status  now  resembled  that  of  an  inferior  and 
protected  prince.  Malta  and  Tripoli  were  given  to  the  Knights  of 
St  John.  A  league  of  the  powers  of  Italy  was  formed,  to  which  finally 
not  only  the  Pope,  Venice,  Florence,  the  Marquis  of  Mantua  now  created 
Duke,  but  also  the  Duke  of  Savoy,  and  all  the  minor  States  adhered. 


Causes  of  Charles^  success  61 

The  Duke  of  Ferrara  was  to  join  wlien  he  had  been  reconciled  to  the 
Pope.  After  all  was  concluded  Charles  received  at  the  hands  of  the 
Pope  the  iron  crown  of  Lombardy  and  the  imperial  crown,  February 
23-24,  and  left  Italy  for  Germany  (April,  1530).  All  the  years  of  war 
he  had  spent  in  Spain,  and  this  was  the  first  time  he  had  visited  the 
ill-fated  peninsula,  where  so  much  of  all  that  is  precious  had  been 
expended  in  supporting  and  combating  his  claims.  How  much  had 
been  sacrificed  to  these  ends  may  best  be  indicated  by  noting  that  the 
battle  of  Mohacs  was  fought  in  1526,  that  Ferdinand  was  elected  to 
the  thrones  of  Bohemia  and  Hungary  in  the  same  year,  and  that  the 
Diet  of  Speier  and  the  Siege  of  Vienna  are  dated  in  1529. 

The  success  of  Charles  appeared  complete  and  permanent.  Far 
other  and  even  more  difficult  tasks  awaited  him  beyond  the  Alps,  but 
so  far  as  Italy  was  concerned  he  might  sleep  secure.  He  seemed  to  have 
brought  for  once  in  her  troubled  history  unity  to  Italy.  That  so  much 
had  been  achieved  appears  at  first  sight  due  more  to  good  fortune  than 
good  management.  Again  and  again,  above  all  at  Pavia  and  Naples, 
luck  had  declared  in  his  favour  when  everything  seemed  to  promise 
disaster.  But  good  fortune  seldom  comes  where  it  is  wholly  unmerited. 
Though  always  unequal  in  intellect  and  resources  to  the  gigantic  tasks 
that  were  imposed  upon  him,  Charles  had  shown  perseverance  almost 
adequate  to  his  needs.  Moreover,  the  brilliant  work  of  his  servants, 
of  Pescara,  of  Leyva,  of  Lannoy,  of  the  Prince  of  Orange,  even  of  the 
Duke  of  Bourbon,  seems  to  argue  something  in  this  King  which  enabled 
him  to  choose  the  right  men  and  retain  their  permanent  and  devoted 
service.  The  fidelity  of  his  Spanish  and  to  a  less  degree  of  his  German 
soldiers  compares  very  favourably  with  the  conduct  of  other  ill-paid 
mercenaries  during  this  period.  The  Emperor's  name  might  count  for 
much,  but  men  may  also  well  have  felt  that  in  serving  Charles  they 
were  serving  one  who  could  always  be  trusted  to  do  his  best,  who 
would  never  forget  or  neglect  his  duties,  even  though  sheer  physical 
incapacity  might  often  leave  him  far  below  the  level  of  his  conscientious 
aspiration. 

But,  not  less  than  the  inexhaustible  persistency  of  Charles,  the  defects 
of  his  rivals  had  contributed  to  the  result.  Francis'  choice  of  men  was 
persistently  unlucky.  Lautrec  and  Bonnivet  compare  ill  with  the  leaders 
of  the  imperial  army.  French  support  was  never  forthcoming  at  the 
crisis.  When  it  came  it  was  ineffectively  employed.  On  the  Italian 
side  the  leaders  and  the  policy  were  similarly  deficient.  After  all  excuses 
have  been  made  for  the  Duke  of  Urbino  he  must  be  judged  an  un- 
enterprising commander.  Giovanni  de'  Medici,  though  brilliant  as  a 
subordinate,  never  had  a  chance  to  show  if  he  had  the  capacity  to 
conduct  a  campaign.  The  Venetians  never  dared  to  push  home  the 
resolution  on  which  they  had  for  the  moment  decided.  Clement  showed 
all  the  characteristics  of  a  man  of  thought  involved  in  the  uncongenial 


62  Special  features  of  the  ivar  [1521-9 

necessity  01  prompt,  continuous,  and  definite  action.  The  shadowy 
figure  of  Francesco  Sforza  flits  upon  the  stage  and  leaves  no  clear 
impression. 

Some  features  of  the  war  deserve  particular  notice.  It  followed  the 
path  of  least  resistance,  and  was  therefore  concentrated  on  Italy.  The 
invasion  of  France,  of  the  Netherlands,  of  Spain,  though  occasionally 
attempted,  was  always  fruitless.  Germany  was  never  touched,  though 
an  attack  might  have  been  directed  upon  Wiirttemberg,  and  the 
Habsburg  possessions  in  Alsace.  In  each  of  these  countries  national 
resistance  would  be  real  and  vigorous,  the  population  was  warlike. 
Spain  was  further  protected  by  its  inhospitable  country,  north-east 
France  and  the  Netherlands  by  the  numerous  defensible  towns.  Italy 
had  no  effective  feeling  of  nationality,  its  inhabitants  could  fight  for 
others  but  not  for  themselves.  The  immunity  of  the  county  and 
duchy  of  Burgundy  from  attack  is  surprising,  but  their  security  was 
mainly  due  to  the  guarantee  which  the  Swiss  exacted  for  their  Bur- 
gundian  friends  and  neighbours  in  their  French  treaty  of  1522.  Except 
on  this  occasion  the  national  action  of  the  Swiss,  which  for  a  brief  period 
had  decided  the  fortunes  of  Italy,  1512-15,  does  not  reappear.  They 
fought  as  mercenaries,  rarely  for  any  national  interest,  and  even  as  mer- 
cenaries their  unquestioned  military  supremacy  was  passed  away.  The 
best  Spanish  foot  was  probably  better  ;  good  Germans  equally  good. 
Moreover  religious  differences  were  beginning  to  paralyse  the  Con- 
federation, and  the  Reformers  discouraged  foreign  service.  Savoy 
and  Piedmont  were  the  highway  of  the  French  armies,  exposed  on 
the  other  hand  to  the  incursions  and  requisitions  of  the  Imperialists, 
when  they  had  for  the  moment  the  upper  hand  in  Milan.  German 
assistance  in  men  was  more  than  might  have  been  expected,  considering 
the  difficulties  with  which  Ferdinand  had  to  contend  in  the  hereditary 
Habsburg  lands.  When  the  war  was  against  the  Pope,  Lutheran 
ardour  facilitated  recruiting.  The  English  alliance,  though  eagerl}^ 
sought  for,  proved  of  little  advantage  on  any  occasion.  But  the  out- 
come of  events  in  Italy  decided  the  question  of  Henry's  divorce,  and 
with  it  the  defection  of  England  from  the  papal  obedience. 

The  possession  of  Milan,  on  which  the  struggle  chiefly  turned, 
was  a  luxury  to  France,  a  point  of  vital  importance  to  Charles,  so  long 
as  he  held  the  kingdoms  of  Naples  and  Sicily  together  with  the  Nether- 
lands. The  continued  presence  of  two  first-class  Powers  in  the  peninsula 
was  an  impossibility.  On  the  other  hand,  without  the  defence  afforded 
by  the  territory  and  fortresses  of  Lombardy,  Italy  was  constantly  open 
to  invasion,  and  the  value  of  this  barbican  was  shown  in  the  fact  that 
only  once  in  all  these  campaigns  the  kingdom  of  Naples  was  seriously 
threatened,  by  the  invasion  of  Lautrec.  The  other  consideration,  that 
Milan  was  the  door  by  which  the  Spanish  forces  through  Genoa  and  the 
Italian  forces  from  the  South,  could  come  to  the  rescue  of  the  Netherlands 


Resoui'ces  of  the  Netherlands  and  of  Spain  63 

in  event  of  civil  war  or  foreign  attack,  was  not  overlooked  by  Charles 
and  his  advisers,  but  its  full  significance  was  not  in  fact  disclosed  until 
the  reign  of  Philip  11.  On  the  question  of  right  Charles  professed  to 
be  fighting  for  a  vassal  of  the  Empire  wrongfully  deforced  ;  then  for  an 
imperial  fief  forfeited  by  Sforza's  treason  ;  and  the  restitution  of  Milan 
to  Sforza  shows  that  the  plea  of  right  was  not  wholly  insincere. 

We  can  see  that  the  whole  issue  of  the  struggle  centred  in 
the  question  of  finance,  but  unfortunately  we  are  unable  to  follow 
the  details  or  draw  up  any  budget  of  expenses  or  receipts  either  for 
France  or  the  Spanish  possessions.  During  the  years  from  the  election 
to  the  Empire  until  the  Conference  of  Bologna,  the  Netherlands  were 
the  chief  resource  of  Charles.  Year  after  year  the  Estates  voted  unheard- 
of  subsidies ;  the  total  contributions  of  the  Low  Countries  are  estimated 
for  1520-30  at  no  less  than  15,000,000  livres  toumois ;  and  though  a 
considerable  part  of  this  was  consumed  in  the  defence  of  the  provinces, 
for  the  necessities  of  their  government,  and  the  maintenance  of  the 
Court  of  the  Regent,  it  was  to  the  Netherlands  that  Charles  looked 
in  the  moments  of  his  greatest  despair.  Castile  came  next,  so  soon  as 
the  revolt  of  the  Comuiieros  had  been  crushed.  The  annual  income 
of  Spain  may  be  estimated  at  about  1,500,000  ducats,  in  the  first  years 
of  Charles'  reign.  The  Empire  and  the  hereditary  Habsburg  lands  may 
for  this  purpose  be  neglected. 

Money  was  raised  in  Castile  by  pledging  the  taxes  in  advance,  by 
issuing  juros  or  bonds  at  fixed  interest  charged  upon  the  national 
revenues,  by  mortgaging  to  financial  houses  every  possible  source  of 
profit.  In  this  way  the  great  House  of  Fugger  took  over  in  1524  the 
estates  {maestrazgos)  belonging  to  the  masterships  of  the  three  military 
orders,  and  later  the  quicksilver  mines  of  Almaden,  and  the  silver  mines 
of  Guadalcanal.  The  cruzada,  or  revenue  from  indulgences  granted  on 
pretext  of  a  fictitious  crusade,  became  a  regular  source  of  revenue,  and 
when,  as  in  the  time  of  Clement,  the  papal  sanction  was  refused,  the 
King  did  not  scruple  to  raise  it  on  his  own  authority,  and  to  pledge 
it  for  many  years  in  advance.  The  fifth  on  all  treasures  imported  from 
the  Indies  was  since  the  conquest  of  Mexico  becoming  a  valuable  supple- 
ment, and  as  an  exceptional  measure  the  treasure  could  be  seized  and 
juros  issued  in  recompense.  But  the  objection  of  the  Sj^aniards  to  the 
export  of  treasure  from  the  peninsula  made  the  use  of  these  resources 
at  a  distance  a  very  difficult  operation,  which  could  only  be  negotiated 
by  the  aid  of  the  most  powerful  financial  houses.  From  his  early  years 
Charles  relied  greatly  on  the  Fuggers  ;  Genoa  from  the  first,  except  when 
it  was  in  French  hands,  and  in  the  later  years  of  his  reign  Antwerp,  were 
mainstays  of  his  financial  power.  Charles  was  very  punctilious  in  defray- 
ing at  least  the  interest  if  not  the  capital  of  his  debts,  and  thus  he  was 
at  all  times  able  to  borrow  upon  terms.  His  juros  were  sometimes  issued 
at  a  price  equivalent  to  a  rate  of  7|  per  cent.:    but  in  times  of  great 


64  Italian  resources. — Revenues  of  Francis 

need  and  danger,  when  time  was  the  dominant  factor,  he  was  obliged 
to  pay  as  much  as  12  and  even  16  per  cent,  for  loans.  As  time  went  on 
the  revenues  of  the  Netherlands  were  similarly  pledged  in  advance. 

The  revenues  of  the  Duchy  of  Milan  in  time  of  peace  might  have 
been  considerable.  In  time  of  war  they  were  whatever  the  army  could 
raise  from  the  impoverished  inhabitants  ;  and  before  the  war  was  over 
the  state  of  the  country  was  such  that  not  only  was  there  no  superfluous 
wealth,  but  the  army  and  the  inhabitants  alike  seemed  in  a  fair  way  to 
perish  of  starvation.  The  case  of  Naples  and  of  Sicily  was  not  quite  so 
desperate,  in  spite  of  two  rather  serious  risings  in  Sicily  which  we  have 
not  had  occasion  to  mention.  But  here  a  considerable  arni}^  of  occu- 
pation had  to  be  kept  up  and  a  fleet,  if  possible,  for  the  protection  of 
the  coast,  if  not  from  the  French  and  the  Genoese,  at  any  rate  from  the 
pirates  of  Algiers.  The  surplus  revenues  of  the  southern  kingdoms 
cannot  have  been  large,  and  although  very  often  in  an  emergency  Lannoy 
produced  money  to  content  some  starving  troops  or  to  move  some 
paralysed  army,  the  sums  which  are  mentioned  are  almost  always  small, 
and  give  but  a  poor  idea  of  the  capacity  of  the  kingdoms  to  assist  their 
King.  Here  also  the  same  ruinous  policy  was  pursued  as  in  Castile,  of 
pledging  everything  in  advance,  of  selling  everything  that  could  be  sold ; 
and  years  of  peace  would  be  required  before  the  kingdoms  could  recover. 

In  Italy  another  valuable  source  of  occasional  revenue  was  the 
subsidies  raised  from  the  lesser  Italian  States,  which,  unless  actually  at 
war  with  the  Emperor,  could  generally  be  coerced  into  payment,  and,  if 
in  his  alliance,  were  expected  to  contribute  handsomely.  The  Pope  was 
the  largest  giver,  but  Venice  could  sometimes  be  bled,  and  Florence, 
Lucca,  Siena,  Ferrara,  Mantua,  were  often  in  a  condition  which  made 
refusal  difficult. 

The  King  of  France  had  a  better  financial  system  and  was  not 
troubled  like  the  Spanish  King  by  the  necessity  of  consulting  his 
Estates.  His  entire  revenue  was  somewhat  less  than  the  joint  revenues 
of  Spain  and  the  Netherlands,  but  on  the  other  hand  he  could  increase 
it  more  rapidly  by  raising  the  taille^  and  it  was  entirely  at  his  disposal ; 
nor  was  he  troubled  like  Charles  by  the  necessity  of  difficult  financial 
operations  before  he  could  fit  out  an  army.  On  the  other  hand,  when 
his  army  was  abroad  these  obstacles  confronted  him  also.  His  financial 
ministers  were  not  conspicuous  for  honesty,  and  the  institution  of  the 
Tresor  de  VEpargne  in  1523,  to  receive  all  casual  and  unexpected  sums 
of  revenue  and  to  build  up  a  reserve  fund  to  be  at  the  King's  absolute 
disposal,  was  not  so  great  a  success  as  was  hoped.  The  deficits  during 
the  years  of  war  reached  an  alarming  figure,  and  it  is  difficult  to  see 
how  they  were  met.  For  the  credit  system  in  France  was  not  developed 
as  it  was  in  Augsburg,  Genoa,  and  Antwerp.  The  first  public  loans  in 
France  were  raised  on  the  security  of  the  revenues  of  particular  towns  ; 
and  it  was  not  until  1512  that  the  King  began  to  build  up  Lyons  as  a 


Finance  of  Europe  ^5 


financial  centre  to  perform  for  him  the  same  functions  that  the  bourses 
of  Genoa  and  Antwerp  were  fulfilling  for  Charles,  The  attempt  had 
some  success,  and  similar  bourses  were  started  at  Toulouse  (1556)  and 
at  Rouen  (1563).  Henry  II  on  his  accession  acknowledged  the 
debts  of  his  father,  and  the  royal  credit  sensibly  improved.  At  the 
outset  the  King  was  obliged  to  pay  16  per  cent,  for  advances,  but  by 
1550  the  rate  had  fallen  to  12  per  cent.  But  confidence  was  rudely 
shaken  when  in  1557  the  King  suspended  the  payment  of  interest  on 
the  debt,  which  at  that  time  amounted  perhaps  to  five  million  crowns. 

We  can  thus  get  a  glimpse  of  the  methods  by  which  the  enormous 
expenses  of  these  and  subsequent  wars  were  liquidated.  All  the  spare 
cash  of  Europe,  withdrawn  from  commerce  and  industry,  flowed  at  a 
crisis  into  the  King's  coffers  ;  the  road  was  opened  to  national  bankruptcy, 
which  was  general  soon  after  the  treaty  of  Cateau-Cambresis.  Princes 
had  learnt  to  borrow,  but  they  had  not  learnt  to  pay.  The  sources  of 
wealth  were  diverted  from  profitable  and  useful  enterprise  to  destructive 
war ;  and  in  the  long  run  not  even  the  financiers  profited,  though  in  the 
interval  some  capitalists  built  up  fortunes,  which  are  almost  comparable 
with  those  of  our  own  day. 


CHAPTER   III 

HABSBUEG  AND  VALOIS   (II) 

After  the  Treaty  of  Cambray  and  the  Conference  of  Bologna  the 
interest  of  European  history  shifts  its  centre  to  Germany.  Charles' 
efforts  in  the  South  were  chiefly  devoted  to  the  preservation  of  the 
existing  equilibrium  in  Italy,  to  resisting  the  continuous  advance  of 
Muslim  power  in  the  Mediterranean,  and  to  the  restoration  of  some 
degree  of  prosperity  to  the  shattered  homes  of  Italy.  His  main  atten- 
tion was  centred  on  the  religious  question  in  Germany,  and  the  main- 
tenance of  Habsburg  power  on  the  Danube.  France  was  still  a  chronic 
menace,  but  the  wars  were  neither  so  frequent  nor  so  dangerous  as 
they  had  been  from  1522-9.  The  death  of  Margaret  of  Savoy 
(December  1, 1530)  who  had  governed  the  Netherlands  during  Charles' 
minority  (1507-15),  and  again  with  intervals  from  1517  until  her 
death,  made  another  break  with  the  past.  Margaret  had  been  the 
confidante  and  intimate  adviser  of  her  father  Maximilian  and,  although 
for  a  time  after  his  accession  in  the  Netherlands  Charles  had  been 
estranged  from  her,  he  soon  discovered  her  worth,  and  relied  on  her  as 
on  another  self.  She  was  perhaps  the  most  capable  woman  of  her  time, 
well  versed  in  all  the  arts  of  politics  and  diplomacy,  a  friend  of  letters 
and  of  art,  and  under  her  rule  the  authority  of  her  nephew  over  the 
Burgundian  States  had  sensibly  increased,  though  the  prosperity  of  the 
provinces  had  not  shown  a  corresponding  advance.  He  was  fortunate  in 
finding  in  the  circle  of  his  own  family  another  woman,  perhaps  less 
gifted,  but  well  competent  to  take  her  place  and  carry  on  her  policy. 
His  sister  Maria,  the  widow  of  the  unfortunate  King  of  Hungary  who 
fell  at  Mohacz,  was  persuaded  to  undertake  the  task,  for  which  she  had 
shown  her  capacity  in  the  troubles  which  followed  the  death  of  her 
husband  Louis,  and  she  entered  upon  the  duties  of  her  office  in  1531. 
Her  government  was  strengthened  by  the  new  ordinance  establishing 
three  Councils  in  the  Netherlands  for  foreign  affairs,  justice,  and  finance. 
Shortly  before  Charles  had  procured  the  election  of  his  brother,  the 
Archduke  Ferdinand,  to  the  dignity  of  King  of  the  Romans,  and  he 
could  therefore  regard  the  relations  of  his  House  to  Germany  and  the 
Netherlands  as  satisfactorily  established. 


1531-3]  Anxieties  of  Charles  in  Europe  67 

But  his  other  European  concerns  gave  him  grave  cause  for  anxiety, 
Henry  VIII  had  been  brought  into  marked  hostility  with  Charles  by  the 
affair  of  the  divorce.  Francis  was  ever  on  the  look-out  for  opportunities 
of  reversing  the  decisions  of  Cambray.  Clement  was  perplexed  by  the 
demand  for  a  General  Council;  irritated  by  the  appointment  of  the 
Cardinal  of  Colonna,  his  enemy,  as  Governor  of  Naples  ;  and  aggrieved 
by  the  award  of  lleggio  and  Modena  to  the  Duke  of  Ferrara  (April  21, 
1531).  Charles'  earnest  desire  for  joint  action  against  the  Turks  was 
thwarted  by  the  scarcely  concealed  hostility  of  Francis,  and  the  more 
secret  manoeuvring  of  the  Pope.  On  June  9,  1531,  Clement  concluded 
an  agreement  for  the  marriage  of  Catharine  de'  Medici  to  Henry,  Duke  of 
Orleans,  second  son  of  E'rancis,  with  secret  articles  binding  the  Pope  to 
assist  France  in  the  recovery  of  Milan  and  Genoa.  The  German  antago- 
nists of  Ferdinand  were  allied  with  Francis.  The  formation  of  the 
League  of  Schmalkalden  and  the  renewed  advance  of  Solyman  upon 
Vienna  (July,  1532)  added  further  complications,  and  Charles  was  in 
consequence  obliged  to  temporise  with  the  Protestant  Powers  of  Germany 
(August,  1532).  Aid  was  sent  to  Ferdinand  not  only  from  Germany 
but  from  Italy,  which  for  once  enabled  Ferdinand  to  meet  the  enemy  in 
force  ;  Solyman  retired  and  Charles  had  a  respite. 

In  the  autumn  of  1532  Charles  was  again  able  to  visit  Italy.  Here 
he  found  all  the  States  wavering.  Venice  watched  the  situation  with  a- 
cautious  eye,  well  informed  of  all  that  was  moving  in  every  Court,  and 
ready  to  take  any  advantage  that  offered.  Milan  groaned  under  the 
foreign  occupation.  Mantua  and  Ferrara  were  of  doubtful  fidelity.  In 
Florence,  where  the  old  constitution  had  been  abolished  in  1532  in 
favour  of  an  unmasked  autocracy,  and  in  Genoa,  where  the  party  of 
Spinola  and  Fiesco  still  were  strong,  there  were  powerful  political  forces 
working  for  change.  Armed  intervention  had  been  necessary  at  Siena. 
After  a  long  visit  to  Mantua,  where  the  famous  meeting  with  Titian 
took  place,  Charles  met  the  Pope  once  more  at  Bologna  (December, 
1532).  Clement  managed  to  avoid  the  General  Council  by  imposing 
impossible  conditions ;  and  Charles  failed  to  induce  him  to  give  up  the 
projected  marriage  of  Catharine  with  the  Duke  of  Orleans.  All  that  he 
could  secure  was  the  renewal  of  a  defensive  League  in  which  Clement, 
Milan,  Ferrara,  Mantua,  Genoa,  Lucca,  Siena,  were  all  included.  Venice 
alone  refused  to  join  even  this  deceptive  League.  On  April  9  Charles 
left  Italy  for  Spain,  where  his  presence  had  long  been  eagerly  desired. 

The  marriage  of  Henry  with  Anne  Boleyn,  which  was  solemnised 
on  May  23,  1533,  now  threatened  a  change  in  the  political  situation. 
But  Henry  was  in  close  alliance  with  Francis  ;  and  Charles  was  obliged 
to  accept  the  insult.  And  although  on  July  11  the  Pope  launched 
against  Henry  the  Bull  of  Excommunication,  which  was  not  however 
to  come  into  force  until  October,  he  was  at  the  same  time  arranging 
for  a  meeting  with  Francis,  and  preparing  to  hand  over  in  person  his 


68  The  pirates  of  Algiers  [1533-4 

niece  to  the  Duke  of  Orleans.  The  meeting  took  place  at  IMarseilles  in 
October,  1533.  What  matters  may  have  been  discussed  between  these 
rulers,  whether  Francis  disclosed  to  the  Head  of  Christendom  his  pro- 
jected alliance  with  the  Turks,  is  unknown,  and  matters  little,  for 
Clement  did  not  live  to  see  any  of  their  plans  carried  into  execution. 
But  the  marriage  sets  the  stamp  on  his  policy  and  marks  it  as 
essentially  dynastic,  not  Italian  or  ecclesiastical.  In  order  to  win  a 
doubtful  Milan  for  his  niece,  he  was  ready  to  expose  the  peninsula 
once  more  to  the  terrors  of  war,  terrors  of  which  he  had  earned  bitter 
and  personal  experience. 

The  death  of  the  Marquis  of  Montferrat  in  1533  and  the  enfeoff- 
ment by  Cliarles  of  the  Duke  of  Mantua  with  this  frontier  State  led  to 
hostilities  between  Saluzzo  and  Mantua  which  shook  the  unstable 
equipoise  of  Italy.  The  news  of  the  conquest  of  Peru  (1532),  and  the 
welcome  arrival  of  its  treasures,  were  items  to  set  on  the  other  side. 
But  the  relations  between  the  German  Protestants  and  Francis  assumed 
a  more  dangerous  phase  in  1534  when  the  Habsburgs  were  driven  out 
of  Wiirttemberg.  In  September  Francis  made  proposals  to  Charles 
which  showed  that  he  was  meditating  the  disturbance  of  peace.  A 
double  marriage  was  to  unite  the  royal  Houses ;  but  Milan,  Asti,  and 
Genoa  were  to  return  to  France,  and  the  Emperor  was  to  give  satis- 
faction to  Francis'  allies  in  Germany.  The  last  condition  showed  that 
war  was  inevitable  ;  but  Charles  determined  to  gain  time  by  negotiations 
until  a  needful  piece  of  work  had  been  accomplished. 

For  years  the  western  waters  of  the  Mediterranean  had  been  rendered 
unsafe  by  a  settlement  of  Muslim  pirates  on  the  north  coast  of  Africa, 
whose  headquarters  were  at  Algiers.  In  1518  an  expedition  from  Spain 
had  succeeded  in  defeating  and  killing  Barbarossa,  the  founder  of  this 
power,  but  his  younger  brother,  Khair  Eddin,  who  is  known  as  Barba- 
rossa II,  had  then  taken  up  the  command,  under  the  protectioii  of  the 
Porte,  and  had  still  further  extended  the  strength  and  activity  of  his 
robber  fleets.  The  settlement  by  Charles  of  the  Knights  of  St  John  at 
Tripoli  and  Malta  (1530)  had  been  intended  to  afford  a  counterpoise  to 
the  Muslim,  and  war  had  been  waged  on  both  sides  with  piracy  and 
rapine.  The  dangers  of  this  situation  concerned  Charles  above  all 
others.  Not  only  had  Spain  a  number  of  possessions  dotted  along  the 
Af  I'ican  coast,  but  the  coasts  of  Spain,  Naples,  and  Sicily  were  especially 
exposed  to  the  raids  of  the  pirate  fleets,  and  their  active  commerce 
was  endangered.  During  the  Italian  wars  Charles  had  neither  leisure 
nor  spare  energy  to  attend  to  this  peril ;  but  now  immediate  measures 
were  not  only  desirable  but  possible.  The  Barbaresques  had  recently 
extended  their  power  to  Tunis,  and  in  July,  1534,  emboldened  by  the 
unconcealed  favour  of  Francis,  who  had  concluded  with  them  a  com- 
mercial truce,  they  had  made  a  raid  of  unusual  extent  upon  the  Italian 
coast.     Barbarossa  had  also  been  named  by  Solyman  as  admiral  of  the 


1534-5]  Death  of  Pope  Clement  VII  69 

Turkish  fleet ;  and  though  still  a  pirate  he  was  the  representative  of  a 
great  Power. 

Charles  considered  that  there  might  just  be  time  for  a  blow  before 
he  was  once  more  paralysed  by  hostilities  with  France.  The  winter  of 
1534  was  spent  in  preparations,  and  on  May  30,  1535,  Charles  sailed 
from  Barcelona,  and  was  joined  by  Doria  from  Genoa  and  the  galleys 
of  Italy  and  Sicily.  Assistance  came  from  Portugal,  from  the  Knights 
of  Malta,  from  Venice,  and  other  Italian  States,  and  especiall}^  from  the 
new  Pope  Paul  III.  The  force  amounted  to  74  galleys,  30  smaller  war- 
ships, and  300  ships  of  burden.  The  attack  was  directed  against  Tunis 
and  proved  completely  successful.  Landing  at  Carthage,  the  army  first 
won  its  way  into  the  fortress  of  Goletta,  taking  84  ships  and  200  guns, 
and  then  after  some  hesitation  advanced  upon  Tunis,  defeated  the 
troops  of  Barbarossa,  and,  assisted  by  the  rising  of  some  5000  Christian 
slaves,  captured  the  town.  The  former  ruler  of  Tunis,  Muley  Hassan, 
was  restored  there,  the  Spaniards  retaining  Goletta,  Bona,  and  Biserta. 
Charles  returned  in  triumph  to  Sicily,  though  he  had  not  ventured 
to  attack  Algiers.  The  blow  was  opportune,  for  a  few  months  later 
(February,  1536)  Francis  concluded  a  treaty  with  Solyman,  with  whom 
he  had  previously  entered  into  relations  in  1525  and  1528.  It  had 
another  significance,  for  the  Moors  of  Valencia,  after  their  forcible  con- 
version to  Christianity  ordered  in  1525  and  executed  in  the  following 
years,  had  been  in  relations  with  the  Muslim  in  Africa,  and  many  of 
them  had  escaped  to  swell  the  bands  of  Barbarossa. 

Meanwhile,  on  September  25,  1534,  Clement  had  died,  nowhere 
regretted,  unless  in  France.  To  him  more  than  to  any  other  man  is 
due  the  success  of  the  Reformation,  as  a  movement  antagonistic  to 
Rome.  Intent  upon  dynastic  and  political  interests,  he  had  not  only 
refused  persistently  to  face  the  question  of  religion,  but  he  had  done  as 
much  as  any  to  fetter  the  only  force,  except  his  own,  that  could  have 
attempted  its  solution.  At  his  death  all  England,  Denmark,  Sweden, 
part  of  Switzerland,  and  the  half  of  Germany,  were  in  revolt ;  but  up  to 
the  last  the  possession  of  Florence  or  Milan  was  of  more  account  in 
his  eyes  than  the  religious  interests  of  all  Christendom.  The  College  of 
Cardinals,  immediately  on  their  meeting,  came  to  the  almost  unanimous 
choice  of  Alessandro  Farnese,  who  took  the  name  of  Paul  III.  He  soon 
showed  his  proclivities  by  attempting  to  take  Camerino  from  Francesco 
Maria  della  Rovere,  the  Duke  of  Urbino,  to  give  it  to  his  own  son 
Pierluigi.  But  the  choice  of  the  Cardinals  was  grateful  to  the  Emperor, 
who  hoped  better  things  from  Farnese  than  he  had  ever  obtained  from 
Clement,  and  in  particular  the  summons  of  a  General  Council. 

The  death  of  Francesco  Sforza  (November  1,  1535),  to  whom  the 
Emperor  had  in  1534  given  his  niece  Christina  of  Denmark,  disturbed 
the  settlement  of  Milan  and  threatened  the  early  outbreak  of  war. 
Charles  seems  to  have  made  up  his  mind  to  this,  for  the  demands  now 


70  Conquest  of  Savoy  hy  France  [1535-6 

made  by  him  oil  France  were  provocative  rather  than  conciliatory.  He 
offered  the  Duchy  of  Milan  not  to  the  Duke  of  Orleans  but  to  Charles, 
Duke  of  Angouleme,  with  the  hand  of  Christina  of  Denmark,  requiring 
in  return  the  support  of  France  in  the  matter  of  the  General  Council, 
against  the  Turks,  and  in  particular  against  Barbarossa,  for  the  recogni- 
tion of  Ferdinand's  election,  for  the  subjection  of  Hungary,  against 
Henry  VIII,  and  even  in  Denmark,  Norway,  and  Sweden.  Even  Milan 
was  not  to  be  unconditionally  given,  for  the  Emperor  was  to  retain  the 
chief  places  under  his  own  captains  and  the  Duke  of  Angouleme  was  to 
be  deposited  in  his  hands.  The  position  of  Charles  was  strengthened 
on  the  one  hand  by  the  death  of  his  aunt.  Queen  Catharine,  January  7, 
1536,  and  on  the  other  hand  by  the  attitude  of  the  Bavarian  Dukes, 
who  for  dynastic  reasons  now  turned  more  definitely  to  the  imperial  side. 
The  Pope  maintained  neutrality,  and  his  help  could  only  be  expected 
for  France  if  the  guilt  of  aggression  could  be  fastened  on  the  Emperor. 

The  Duchy  of  Savoy,  during  the  campaigns  of  the  first  war,  had 
been  at  the  disposal  of  the  French,  and  opened  for  them  the  easiest  path 
to  Italy.  But  the  settlement  after  the  peace  of  Cambray  had  brought 
the  weak  Duke  Charles  III  into  the  imperial  defensive  league,  and  his 
marriage  with  Beatrice  of  Portugal,  in  1521,  followed  by  the  marriage 
of  the  Emperor  with  her  sister  in  1526,  formed  a  permanent  link.  The 
first  step  therefore  towards  Italy  required  the  subjection  or  adhesion  of 
.Savoy,  and  the  somewhat  fanciful  claims  which  the  King  of  France  put 
forward  to  a  part  of  the  ducal  inheritance  can  only  be  regarded  as  a 
cover  for  attack  or  a  pretext  for  coercion.  Charles  III  was  the  weaker 
at  this  moment  since  he  had  been  at  war  since  1530  with  his  city  of 
Geneva  ;  and  early  in  the  year  1536  his  hopes  of  recovering  the 
town  were  shattered  by  an  expedition  of  Bern  and  the  Swiss  Pro- 
testants, which  relieved  Geneva  and  overran  the  territory  of  Lausanne 
and  the  Pays  de  Vaud.  In  March,  1536,  the  French  invaded  Savoy, 
and,  in  spite  of  the  obstinate  resistance  of  its  inhabitants,  conquered  the 
whole  of  Savoy,  and  occupied  Turin.  The  remainder  of  the  fortified 
places  in  Piedmont  were  seized  by  order  of  de  Leyva  from  Milan,  to 
prevent  their  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  French. 

Meanwhile  since  his  landing  in  Sicily,  August  17,  1535,  Charles  had 
been  devoting  his  attention  to  his  southern  kingdoms.  Sicily  he  now 
visited  for  the  first  time,  and  he  spent  ten  weeks  in  considering  proposi- 
tions of  reform  laid  before  him  by  the  Parliament,  and  in  inspecting  the 
country.  Thence  he  passed  into  Italy,  leaving  Ferrante  da  Gonzaga  as 
Viceroy  in  Sicily,  and  reached  Naples  on  November  25.  Here  Pedro 
di  Toledo  had  been  Viceroy  since  1532,  and  had  given  himself  to  the 
restoration  of  order,  the  improvement  of  the  city,  and  the  re-establish- 
ment and  extension  of  the  royal  power.  An  attempt  which  was  made 
to  induce  Charles  to  remove  him  only  resulted  in  strengthening  his 
position,  for  it  soon  appeared  that  the  charges  against  him  arose  from 


1536]  Invasion  of  Provence  71 

the  stern  impartiality  of  his  administration.  At  Naples  Charles  remained 
four  niontlis  and  a  subsidy  of  a  million  ducats  was  voted  to  him,  after  a 
larger  offer  made  in  a  vainglorious  spirit  had  been  wisely  refused.  That 
so  large  a  sum  could  be  raised  proves  the  excellent  results  of  Toledo's 
three  years'  rule.  From  Naples  Charles  proceeded  to  Rome,  learning  on 
his  way  that  the  French  had  attacked  Savoy.  He  had  already  begun  his 
preparations  for  defence  in  Navarre  and  Roussillon,  and  now  sent  urgent 
orders  to  assemble  troops  and  collect  money. 

His  presence  in  Italy,  however,  was  worth  an  army  to  his  cause. 
While  still  in  Naples  he  had  succeeded  in  securing  Venice  once  more  for 
the  defensive  league,  and  after  his  magnificent  entry  into  Rome  on  April  5, 
1536,  he  could  hope  that  personal  influence  and  concessions  to  the  Pope's 
family  ambitions  would  secure  for  him  at  least  the  neutrality  of  Rome. 
Eager,  however,  to  vindicate  his  honour,  he  made  before  the  Consistory 
and  Ambassadors  in  solemn  session  a  detailed  exposition  of  his  case  against 
France  and  called  upon  the  Pope  to  decide  between  them.  Paul  III 
declared  his  intention  of  remaining  neutral,  and,  yielding  at  length  to 
long-continued  pressure,  he  issued  on  May  29  a  Bull  summoning  a 
General  Council  to  Mantua  for  May,  1537.  The  Pope  had  promised  to 
do  his  best  to  reconcile  the  parties ;  but  as  France  was  determined  to 
accept  nothing  less  than  Milan  for  the  Duke  of  Orleans,  and  Charles 
could  not,  in  view  of  the  Dauphin's  precarious  life,  accept  his  second 
brother,  Henry,  whose  marriage  alliance  with  the  Medici  family  was 
another  bar,  the  prospects  of  successful  mediation  were  poor.  But  the 
position  in  Italy  seemed  fairly  secure  ;  and  Henry  of  England,  though 
an  impossible  ally  for  the  Emperor,  was  too  busy  at  home  to  cause 
much  anxiety.  The  contest  thus  confined  itself  to  France,  and  Charles, 
who  had  collected  a  great  army  of  50,000  or  60,000  men,  was  unwilling 
to  consume  it  in  the  unpretending  task  of  reconquering  Savoy. 

The  invasion  of  Provence  seemed  likely  to  secure  the  evacuation  of 
Savoy,  besides  the  promise  of  further  gain.  Accordingly  on  July  25, 
1586,  the  imperial  army,  taking  advantage  of  the  accession  of  the 
Marquis  of  Saluzzo  to  the  Emperor's  side,  crossed  the  French  border. 
But  Montmorency,  to  whom  Francis  had  entrusted  the  chief  command, 
maintained  the  strictest  defensive.  His  army  was  lodged  in  two  fortified 
camps  at  Avignon  and  Valence  ;  the  country  was  systematically  devas- 
tated ;  and  Charles,  though  he  was  able  to  advance  to  Aix,  found  an 
attack  on  Marseilles  or  Aries  impracticable.  Nothing  could  be  less 
French  and  nothing  could  be  more  effective  than  the  strategy  of  Mont- 
morency.    On  September  13  Charles  was  obliged  to  order  the  retreat. 

Meanwhile  in  the  north  the  Count  of  Nassau  had  conquered  Guise 
and  undertaken  the  siege  of  Peronne.  But  the  war  was  unpopular  in 
the  Netherlands ;  subsidies  were  unwillingly  granted  and  the  money 
came  in  slowly ;  Peronne  held  out  under  the  vigorous  command  of 
Fleuranges  ;  and  at  the  end  of  September  Nassau  also  was  forced  to 


72  Cosimo  /,  Duke  of  Florence  [1536-7 

retire.  In  Italy  Leyva  was  dead,  and  the  prospects  of  the  imperial  cause 
were  not  promising.  The  little  place  of  Mirandola,  whose  ruler,  Galeotto 
Pica,  had  put  himself  under  the  protection  of  France,  was  a  valuable 
outpost  for  the  French,  a  base  where  their  troops  could  find  harbour  and 
issue  forth  to  attack  the  confines  of  Lombardy.  On  August  10  the 
Dauphin  had  died,  and  the  offer  of  Milan  to  Charles  of  Angouleme 
assumed  a  different  aspect.  Charles  while  negotiating  for  peace  pre- 
pared for  war. 

For  this  purpose  it  was  necessary  that  he  should  visit  Spain  to  raise 
the  necessary  funds,  leaving  many  Italian  questions  unsettled.  The 
Duke  of  Mantua  received  the  investiture  of  Montferrat.  Del  Guasto 
was  appointed  to  the  command  in  Milan  in  place  of  Leyva.  But  the 
attitude  of  the  Pope  aroused  suspicion;  and  Charles  was  obliged  to 
depart  without  having  contented  him.  On  November  17  he  left  Genoa ; 
but  his  journey  was  repeatedly  interrupted  by  storms,  while  a  hostile 
fleet  of  French  and  Turkish  galleys  lay  at  Marseilles.  At  length  the  fleet 
was  able  to  make  the  coast  of  Catalonia.  In  Spain  many  months  and 
continuous  efforts  resulted  in  the  raising  of  sums  quite  insufficient  to 
meet  the  pressing  needs.  Francis  meanwhile  had  proclaimed  the  re- 
sumption of  the  suzerainty  over  Flanders  and  Artois,  which  he  had 
renounced  at  the  Peace  of  Cambray ;  and  on  March  16, 1537,  a  consider- 
able army  invaded  Artois.  Hesdin  surrendered,  and  Charles  of  Gelders 
was  once  more  in  arms.  But  Francis  soon  grew  weary  and  drew  away  a 
large  part  of  his  army  to  the  south  ;  the  Estates  of  the  Netherlands 
granted  for  self-defence  the  sums  which  they  had  refused  for  general 
purposes ;  the  attack  was  driven  back ;  and  on  July  30  a  ten  months' 
armistice  was  concluded  for  the  Netherlands  and  north-eastern  France. 

Meanwhile  del  Guasto  had  held  his  own  in  Lombardy  and  even  won 
back  some  places  of  Piedmont  from  the  enemy.  The  Turkish  assistance 
had  been  worth  little  to  the  French.  Even  in  the  kingdom  of  Sicily, 
owing  to  the  energetic  measures  of  defence,  Barbarossa  had  been  able 
to  effect  little.  The  Mediterranean  war  deviated  into  a  contest  between 
Venice  and  the  Muslim.  The  remaining  islands  of  the  Aegean  fell  into 
the  hands  of  the  Barbaresques.  Nauplia  and  Monembasia,  the  sole 
strongholds  of  Venice  in  the  Morea,  were  besieged  by  the  Turks. 
The  murder  of  Alessandro  de'  Medici  in  Florence,  January  7,  1537, 
strengthened  rather  than  weakened  the  position  of  Charles  in  Italy. 
In  spite  of  the  efforts  of  French  agents  the  imperial  vicegerents  had 
their  way ;  the  attacks  of  the /Morwsa^i  under  Filippo  Strozzi,  though 
aided  by  the  French,  were  driven  off;  and  the  cool  and  competent 
Cosimo  became  Duke  of  Florence  in  the  imperial  interests,  and  was 
married  to  a  daughter  of  Toledo.  Filippo  Strozzi  was  put  to  torture 
and  died  in  prison.  Paul  was  won  over  by  the  gift  of  Alessandro's 
widow  Margaret,  the  Emperor's  natural  daughter,  to  his  grandson, 
Ottavio  Farnese,    and    Pierluigi,    the    Pope's  son,   was   invested  with 


1537-8]       Truce  between  Francis  and  the  Emjjeror  73 

Novara.  On  Februaiy  8,  1538,  a  defensive  league  against  the  Turk 
was  concluded  between  the  Pope,  the  Emperor,  Ferdinand,  and  Venice, 
which  prepared  the  way  for  a  favourable  intervention  of  the  Pope 
between  the  two  great  Powers. 

However,  in  October,  1537,  Montmorency  with  a  new  army  had 
appeared  in  Savoy,  and  the  imperial  troops  were  obliged  to  evacuate 
Pinerolo  and  Turin.  But  these  successes  led  to  nothing  further. 
Both  monarchs  were  ready  for  peace;  an  armistice  was  concluded 
(November,  1537)  ;  negotiations  began  in  earnest,  but  were  long  pro- 
longed, so  many  were  the  questions  at  issue  between  the  rivals.  After 
the  conclusion  of  the  League  against  the  Turks  the  Pope  left  Rome,  and 
journeyed  to  Nice,  to  mediate  between  Francis  and  Charles.  Here  some 
ill-feeling  was  aroused  because  the  Duke  of  Savoy  refused  to  put  the 
fortress  of  Nice,  his  last  remaining  possession,  in  Charles'  hand  for  the 
meetings.  In  a  neighbouring  monastery  therefore  the  Emperor  and 
King  negotiated  personally  and  separately  with  the  Pope,  and  a  truce 
was  arranged  for  ten  years  (June  17, 1538),  on  the  basis  of  uti  possidetis. 
The  Pope  and  Emperor  set  forth  at  once  for  Genoa  to  concert  operations 
against  the  Turk. 

Although  at  Nice  the  King  and  the  Emperor  had  refused  to  meet,  it 
soon  became  known  that  a  future  interview  had  been  arranged,  perhaps 
through  the  mediation  of  Queen  Eleonora.  At  Aigues-Mortes  the  visits 
took  place  on  July  14-16,  with  the  most  surprising  demonstrations  of 
good  feeling.  Nothing  definite  was  arranged,  but  hopes  of  agreement 
succeeded  to  something  like  despair.  And  Charles  was  anxious  to  make 
the  most  of  the  apparent  friendship. 

For  the  Emperor  the  war  of  1536-7  had  been  on  the  whole  far  less 
successful  than  those  of  1522-9.  Francis  had  overrun  almost  the  whole 
of  Savoy  and  Piedmont,  he  had  invaded  Artois,  and  successfully  repelled 
two  invasions  of  France.  He  was  content  for  the  present  to  rest  upon 
his  conquests,  to  hold  Savoy,  an  outpost  for  defence,  a  ready  road  for 
attack,  and  to  defer  the  settlement  of  other  outstanding  questions  for 
a  season.  Charles  was  the  more  ivilling  to  leave  Savoy  in  Francis' 
possession  because  the  Duke  had  offended  him  deeply  in  the  matter  of 
Nice.  On  the  other  hand  he  needed  peace  above  all  for  his  affairs  in 
Germany,  and  to  meet  the  Turkish  danger.  A  long  truce  with  the 
appearance  of  durability  suited  him  as  well  or  better  than  a  peace, 
which  could  only  have  been  secured  at  the  price  of  humiliating  and 
damaging  concessions.  In  fact  the  two  Powers,  after  violent  oscillations 
to  and  fro,  had  reached  a  position  of  comparatively  stable  equilibrium. 
They  had  learnt  their  own  limitations,  and  the  strength  of  their  adver- 
saries. A  stage  was  reached  on  the  road  to  the  more  permanent  settle- 
ment of  Cateau-Cambresis. 

The  truce  between  the  great  Powers  and  the  League  of  1538  led  to 


74  Revolt  of  Ghent  [i538-40 

the  hope  that  something  serious  would  now  be  undertaken  against  the 
Turks.  But  exhaustion,  the  mutiny  of  soldiers  at  Goletta,  in  Sicily,  in 
Lombardy,  a  thousand  reasons  made  it  impossible  for  Charles  to  put  out 
his  full  strength  in  1538.  The  force  that  was  sent  under  Andrea  Doria 
to  the  Levant  from  Sicily,  Naples,  Genoa,  and  Barcelona,  to  co-operate 
with  the  Venetians  and  a  papal  squadron,  had  no  orders  to  undertake 
any  great  enterprise.  The  Venetians  desired  to  attack  Prevesa,  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Gulf  of  Arta,  where  the  Turkish  fleet  was  lying,  but  Doria 
was  unwilling  to  risk  so  much  on  a  single  encounter ;  national,  urban, 
and  personal  jealousies  were  at  work ;  the  League,  like  other  leagues, 
soon  showed  its  inherent  weakness ;  futile  skirmishes  were  the  only 
result;  and  the  allies  soon  began  to  talk  of  peace.  Charles  had 
important  business  elsewhere,  in  the  Netherlands,  in  Germany,  and  the 
enterprise  was  put  off.  After  long  negotiations,  delays,  and  disappoint- 
ments, the  Venetians  made  peace  with  the  Turks  (October,  1540),  sur- 
rendering Nauplia  and  Monembasia. 

Not  only  the  affairs  of  Germany,  becoming  more  and  more  com- 
plicated, but  a  serious  difficulty  in  the  Netherlands  contributed  to  this 
result.  The  war  of  1536  had  necessitated  application  to  the  States- 
General  of  the  Netherlands  for  a  heavy  subsidy.  All  the  provinces 
consented  (1537),  and  in  Flanders  the  three  Members  Ypres,  Bruges, 
and  le  Fratic  gave  their  vote,  but  Ghent  refused ;  and  when  Mary 
declared  that  the  grant  of  three  Members  out  of  four  bound  also  the 
fourth,  and  took  measures  to  levy  the  citj^'s  quota,  the  citizens  appealed 
to  Charles,  who  gave  his  full  support  to  his  vicegerent.  After  prolonged 
discontent,  at  length  in  1539  Ghent  broke  into  oj)en  rebellion.  The 
government  of  the  town  gave  way  to  the  pressure  of  the  mob,  forti- 
fications were  repaired,  militia  was  levied,  the  subject-cities  of  Ghent, 
Alost,  Oudenarde,  and  Courtrai  were  drawn  into  the  rising,  and  Mary 
was  obliged  to  recognise  the  revolutionary  movement. 

At  this  moment  the  friendly  relations  of  Charles  with  France  stood 
him  in  good  stead.  Charles  had  recently  lost  his  beloved  wife,  Isabella 
of  Portugal,  and  the  French  King  hoped  to  engage  him  in  some  profit- 
able marriage  alliance.  He  offered  a  free  passage  through  his  States, 
and  Charles,  though  he  refused  to  hear  of  any  marriage  propositions, 
accepted  the  offer.  Leaving  instructions  to  his  son  Philip  for  the  event 
of  his  death,  which  show  that  he  would  have  been  willing  to  allow  the 
whole  Burgundian  dominions  to  pass  to  a  French  prince  as  the  price  of 
a  permanent  accommodation,  he  passed  through  France,  met  Francis  at 
Loches  (December  12,  1539),  and  was  accompanied  by  him  to  Paris. 
Here  he  was  royally  received,  and  set  on  his  way  to  Valenciennes,  where 
he  met  Mary,  January  21,  1540.  Thence  he  proceeded  to  Brussels. 
The  news  of  his  coming,  with  the  assembling  of  German  troops,  had 
quelled  the  rebellious,  irresolute  spirits  of  Ghent,  and  on  February  14 
he  entered  the  city  without  resistance.     Its  punishment  was  stern  though 


1538^1]  Gelders  and  Jillich-Cleves  75 

not  excessive.  Nine  of  the  ringleaders  were  executed.  The  town,  by 
tearing  up  the  famous  calfskin,  had  declared  its  own  sentence  ;  the 
constitution  was  forfeited  and  an  oligarchical  government  set  up.  The 
disputed  subsidy  and  a  money  indemnity  in  addition  were  exacted. 
The  city  was  deprived  of  its  rights  over  the  surrounding  territory  and 
neighbouring  towns.  A  fortress  was  to  be  built  to  prevent  rebellion  in 
the  future.  Solemn  submission  and  humiliation  were  required.  Finally, 
on  these  terms  the  city  was  pardoned,  at  the  price  of  all  its  remaining 
liberties. 

This  rapid  collapse  of  a  formidable  rebellion  increased  the  prestige 
of  Charles  very  opportunely,  for  the  death  of  Charles  of  Gelders  in  1538, 
instead  of  diminishing  his  difficulties,  had  increased  them.  The  Estates 
of  the  duchy  had  at  once  proceeded  to  the  election  of  William  de  la 
jNIarck,  the  heir  of  Cleves,  Berg,  and  Jiilich.  The  death  of  his  father, 
Duke  John,  soon  followed  (1539),  and  the  union  of  the  four  duchies  under 
a  prince  whose  leanings  were  Protestant  was  a  serious  menace  to  the 
Ilabsburg  power  in  the  north.  Francis  I  gave  Jeanne  d'Albret  to 
William  of  Cleves  (treaty  of  July  17, 1540)  ;  which  compensated  for  the 
rejection  of  his  sister  by  Henry  VIII,  announced  about  the  same  time. 
The  project  of  settling  matters  between  Charles  and  France  by  one  of 
several  alternative  marriage  schemes  had  again  proved  impracticable  ; 
and  this  French  alliance  with  a  German  prince,  an  enemy  of  the 
Habsburgs,  showed  a  renewal  of  French  hostility  ;  the  more  so  that 
Charles  had  hoped  that,  by  a  different  disposal  of  Jeanne's  hand,  the 
question  of  Navarre  at  least  might  be  settled  for  ever.  Charles  replied 
by  investing  his  son  Philip  (October  11,  1540)  with  the  duchy  of  Milan. 

Affairs  in  Italy  were  fairly  quiet.  The  reduction  of  Camerino  by 
the  papal  forces  (1539),  the  revolt  of  Perugia  (1540),  the  refusal  of 
the  Viceroy  of  Naples  to  allow  his  forces  to  co-operate  in  its  repression, 
and  quarrels  between  Ottavio  Farnese  and  his  bride,  were  not  sufficient  to 
disturb  the  firm  foundations  on  which  the  Spanish  supremacy  was  built. 
The  rebellion  and  chastisement  of  the  Colonna  were  allowed  to  pass  as  of 
purely  local  importance.  It  was  thought  that  some  of  these  movements 
had  been  instigated  to  induce  the  Pope  to  give  effect  to  the  long- 
promised  Council,  but  the  Council,  which  had  been  put  off  time  after 
time,  seemed  as  far  distant  as  ever.  The  conference  at  Ratisbon 
(1541)  and  the  benevolent  intervention  of  Contarini  proved  of  no  avail, 
except  to  show  that  the  Lutherans  would  not  accept  even  the  decisions 
of  a  General  Council. 

Secure  for  the  time  in  Italy,  and  temporising  as  usual  in  Germany, 
Charles  thought  the  moment  propitious  for  another  attack  on  the  power 
of  the  Barbaresques.  When  war  with  France  once  more  became  in- 
evitable, the  control  of  the  western  seas  would  be  valuable ;  and 
meanwhile  commerce  and  coast  towns  urgently  required  relief.  Since 
1538   an  attempt  had  been  made  to  win  over  Barbarossa  by  way  of 


76  Expedition  against  Algiers. — French  ivar     [1541-2 

negotiation.  Charles  hoped  to  secure  the  corsair  for  his  own  service,  to 
create  for  him  a  vassal  kingdom  including  Tunis,  and  to  turn  his  arms 
against  the  Porte.  But  at  the  last  moment  Barbarossa  declined  the 
proposals,  and  Charles  determined  if  possible  to  destroy  his  power.  In 
July,  1541,  two  French  envoys,  Antonio  Rincon,  on  his  way  to  Con- 
stantinople, and  Cesare  Fregoso,  accredited  to  Venice,  were  set  upon 
near  Pavia  and  killed  by  Spanish  soldiers.  Their  papers  were  not 
secured,  but  the  general  nature  of  their  errand  was  notorious.  This 
delayed  the  conclusion  of  a  new  alliance  between  France  and  the  Porte, 
and  before  it  could  be  formed  it  was  necessary  if  possible  to  take 
Algiers.  The  knowledge  of  the  warlike  preparations  of  the  French 
King  seemed  to  make  postponement  till  the  new  year  impossible,  and 
although  the  Diet  of  Ratisbon,  the  journey  through  Italy,  and  a 
hurried  interview  with  the  Pope  had  brought  Charles  to  September,  and 
his  most  experienced  advisers  declared  that  the  season  was  too  late,  he 
determined  to  push  on  his  expedition. 

It  was  October  20,  1541,  before  the  fleet  which  had  collected  at 
Majorca  met  the  Spanish  contingent  off  Algiers.  Heavy  weather 
prevented  them  from  landing  for  two  days,  and  when  at  length  they  were 
able  to  put  the  men  on  shore  the  artillery,  the  supplies,  the  tents  were 
left  on  board.  A  tempest  then  smote  the  array,  who  were  at  the  same 
time  attacked  by  the  Barbaresques  ;  fourteen  galleys  and  a  hundred 
ships  were  driven  ashore  ;  and  Doria  was  obliged  to  draw  off.  The  army 
had  to  go  now  to  Cape  Matifu,  where  they  took  ship  again  at  Bugia, 
and  with  difficulty  set  sail  for  their  homes,  after  severe  losses,  and 
without  any  compensating  success  (November,  1541). 

This  failure  encouraged  the  French  in  their  long-determined  scheme 
of  attack.  New  agents  had  concluded  the  arrangements  with  the  Sultan, 
and  although  the  Venetians  and  Lorraine  refused  to  join,  the  alliance  of 
Cleves,  with  the  support  of  Denmark  and  Sweden,  promised  results, 
though  not  in  Italy.  The  main  objective  this  time  was  the  Netherlands. 
Antoine,  Duke  of  VendQme  (July,  1542),  marched  upon  Artois  and 
Flanders,  hoping  for  a  rising  in  Ghent  and  Antwerp.  From  the  side  of 
Cleves  Martin  van  Rossem  advanced  with  18,000  men,  and  the  Duke  of 
Orleans  with  a  third  army  entered  Luxemburg.  A  fourth  army  entered 
Roussillon  under  Francis  and  invested  Perpignan,  but  the  defence  of 
Perpignan,  under  the  Duke  of  Alva,  checked  any  further  advance  on 
this  side.  Van  Rossem,  after  devastating  Brabant,  and  threatening 
Antwerp,  joined  the  Duke  of  Orleans  in  Luxemburg,  where  before  long 
no  place  of  importance  held  out  excepting  Thionville.  But  the  capri- 
cious withdrawal  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans  from  Luxemburg  with  the 
intention  of  sharing  in  the  great  victory  expected  for  the  King  in  the 
South,  took  the  heart  out  of  this  attack,  and  the  Netherland  troops 
soon  recovered  Luxemburg  except  Ivoy  and  Damvillers.  In  Roussillon 
instead  of  a  victory  an  ignominious  retreat  followed. 


1543-4]         War  ivith  Cleves.     Battle  of  Ceresole  77 

The  following  year  was  threatening  for  Charles.  The  Sultan  was 
advancing  in  force  upon  Vienna.  Barbarossa  after  devastating  the 
coasts  of  Italy  joined  the  French  fleet  under  the  Duke  of  Enghien,  and 
laid  siege  to  Nice  (August  5,  1543).  The  city  surrendered  before  long  ; 
but  the  citadel  held  out,  until  it  was  relieved  by  the  approach  of 
del  Guasto  by  land  and  of  Andrea  Doria  by  sea  (September  8). 
Barbarossa  returned  to  winter  at  Toulon,  where  througliout  the  winter 
Christian  slaves  were  openly  sold.  Francis  on  his  part  invaded  Hainault. 
But  Charles,  leaving  Barcelona  for  Genoa  with  the  fleet  of  Doria,  arrived 
in  Italy  (May,  1543),  and,  after  a  hurried  interview  with  the  Pope,  whose 
desire  for  Milan  or  Siena  he  was  not  able  to  content,  continued  his 
journey  towards  Germany,  with  a  small  force  of  Spaniards  and  Italians. 
The  Council,  already  summoned  (1542)  to  Trent,  had  to  be  postponed ; 
other  things  for  the  moment  were  more  pressing.  Ferdinand  was  left  to 
manage  as  best  he  could  in  the  East.  At  Speier  Charles  picked  up  a 
considerable  force  of  Germans  who  had  assembled  to  bring  aid  against 
the  Turks.  But  Charles  led  them  on  with  him  to  Cleves,  and  attacked 
Duren.  In  two  days  the  city  was  captured  by  assault.  In  a  fortnight 
the  Duke  was  at  his  feet  imploring  pardon,  and  on  September  7,  1543, 
a  treaty  was  signed  by  which  the  Duke  broke  off  all  alliance  with 
France,  Denmark,  and  Sweden,  and  ceded  the  duchy  of  Gelders  with 
the  county  of  Zutphen. 

This  success  fully  compensated  for  the  reoccupation  of  Luxemburg 
by  the  French  which  was  completed  about  the  middle  of  September. 
Charles  moved  into  Hainault  to  effect  a  juncture  with  the  troops  which 
Henry,  his  ally  in  this  war  as  he  had  been  in  his  first,  had  sent  to  Calais, 
and  advanced  (October  20)  to  the  siege  of  Landrecies.  Francis  was  in 
the  neighbourhood  with  a  superior  army ;  Charles  was  anxious  to  meet 
him  in  the  field,  and  advanced  in  hopes  of  tempting  him  to  battle.  In 
this  he  did  not  succeed,  but  the  retreat  of  the  French  army  left  him  with 
the  honours  of  the  campaign. 

But  the  war  was  not  over,  and  Charles  needed  all  the  aid  that  could 
be  by  any  means  procured.  Henry  was  induced  to  promise  to  invade 
France  in  the  coming  spring  with  an  army  of  35,000  men.  Peace  was 
made  with  Christian  III  of  Denmark.  At  the  Diet  of  Speier,  1544, 
Charles  met  the  German  Princes  and  by  extensive  concessions  secured 
the  neutrality  or  support  of  the  Protestant  Estates.  Frangois,  Count 
d'Enghien,  had  invaded  Italy,  and  advanced  to  recover  Carignano  near 
Turin,  which  del  Guasto  had  occupied.  Del  Guasto  hurried  from  Milan 
to  relieve  it ;  and  d'Enghien,  having  received  permission  to  risk  a  battle, 
attacked  him  at  Ceresole  on  April  14,  1544,  and  completely  defeated 
him,  with  the  loss  of  some  8000  killed  and  2000  prisoners.  All  Italy 
began  to  consider  the  division  of  the  spoil,  but  their  hopes  were 
vain.  The  Spanish,  holding  all  the  strong  places  of  Lombardy,  were 
enabled  to  prevent  d'Enghien  from  any  further  success.    Piero  Strozzi, 


78  Peace  of  Crepy  [l544 

who  had  collected  10,000  foot  at  Mirandola,  advanced  boldly  to 
Milan,  in  the  hopes  of  joining  d'Enghien  there,  but  the  Swiss  refused 
to  move  for  want  of  pay,  and  Strozzi  had  to  extricate  himself  as 
best  he  could,  and  the  brilliant  victory  of  Ceresole  had  no  results. 
Still  the  news  of  this  defeat  rendered  his  success  at  Speier  the  more 
welcome  to  Charles. 

His  army  under  Count  William  von  Fiirstenberg  now  advanced  upon 
Luxemburg  and  recovered  his  duchy.  The  siege  of  St  Dizier  was 
then  undertaken  ;  and  on  July  13  Charles  arrived,  with  10,000  foot, 
2300  horse,  and  1600  sappers,  to  take  part  in  the  siege.  Here  the 
Prince  of  Orange  was  struck  by  a  bullet,  and  died  on  the  following  day, 
leaving  as  his  heir  his  more  famous  cousin,  Count  William  of  Nassau. 
The  siege  dragged  on,  while  the  Dauj)hin  and  the  Admiral  Annebaut 
with  a  strong  army  of  observation  lay  at  Jalons,  between  Epernay  and 
Chalons,  and  outposts  at  Vitry  harassed  the  besiegers.  But  on  July  23 
these  outposts  were  crushed  with  considerable  loss  to  the  French.  On 
August  17  Sancerre,  the  captain,  surrendered  St  Dizier  with  all  the 
honours  of  war.  Charles  now  advanced  on  Chalons  and,  declining  to 
attack  the  Dauphin's  army,  pressed  on  to  Chateau-Thierry  and  to 
Soissons  (September  12). 

If  Henry's  army  had  shown  equal  enterprise  the  case  of  France  would 
have  been  desperate.  He  arrived  on  July  15  at  Calais  with  the  bulk  of 
his  army,  and  was  joined  by  the  Count  van  Buren  with  a  small  force 
from  the  Netherlands.  Leaving  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  to  besiege 
Montreuil,  he  proceeded  with  his  main  force  to  besiege  Boulogne. 
Without  aid  from  him  Charles  had  reached  the  end  of  his  tether.  His 
relations  with  the  Pope  were  becoming  more  and  more  uncomfortable. 
Paul  had  allowed  Piero  Strozzi  to  raise  troops  in  his  State ;  the  Orsini 
had  been  suffered  to  join  him ;  and  the  Pope  was  considering  the  gift 
of  his  grandchild  Vittoria  to  the  Duke  of  Orleans  with  Parma  and 
Piacenza  as  her  dowry.  On  the  other  hand  Charles'  position  for  con- 
cluding peace  was  favourable  and  he  seized  it.  The  result  was  the  Peace 
of  Cr^py,  September  18, 1544.  Henry  was  informed  of  the  terms  which 
Charles  was  willing  to  accept ;  he  disapproved  of  the  conditions ;  but 
was  forced  to  content  himself  with  Boulogne,  which  surrendered  on 
September  14. 

On  both  sides  the  territory  occupied  since  the  truce  of  Nice  was  to 
be  restored.  Francis  was  to  renounce  all  claims  to  Naples,  Flanders, 
and  Artois ;  the  Emperor  did  not  insist  on  the  restitution  of  the  duchy 
of  Burgundy.  The  rivals  were  to  co-operate  for  the  restoration  of  unity 
in  the  Church,  and  against  the  Turks.  Charles  was  to  give  to  the 
Duke  of  Orleans  either  his  eldest  daughter  with  the  Burgundian  lands, 
or  the  second  daughter  of  Ferdinand  with  Milan.  If  the  Netherlands 
were  given,  Charles  was  to  retain  the  supreme  dominion  for  his  life,  and 
Francis  was  to  renounce  his  rights  to  Milan  and  Asti,  which  were, 


1544-5]        Fresh  stage  in  the  settlement  of  Europe  79 

however,  to  revive  in  case  there  was  no  issue  of  the  marriage.  If  Mihxn 
were  given  the  Emperor  was  to  retain  effective  hold  on  the  duchy  until 
a  son  was  born  ;  and  the  gift  was  declared  to  be  a  new  fief,  not 
dependent  on  hereditary  rights  of  the  House  of  Orleans.  The  King  in 
return  was  to  give  a  handsome  appanage  to  his  son  in  France.  As  soon 
as  either  of  these  transfers  took  place  Savoy  was  to  be  evacuated,  and 
the  questions  of  right  between  the  King  and  the  Duke  were  to  be  decided 
by  arbitration.  These  public  conditions  were  supplemented  by  a  secret 
treaty,  by  which  the  King  was  required  to  aid  in  procuring  a  General 
Council,  to  give  help  against  the  German  Protestants,  and  to  assist  the 
Emperor  to  a  peace  or  durable  truce  with  the  Turks.  The  Dauphin 
shortly  afterwards  made  a  solemn  protest  before  witnesses  against  the 
treaty  as  contrary  to  the  fundamental  interests  of  the  kingdom.  The 
Pope  was  left  out  in  the  negotiations,  although  the  religious  motive  is 
prominent  in  the  conditions.  But  Paul  was  obliged  to  accommodate 
himself,  and  to  avoid  worse  he  issued  a  fresh  summons  to  the  Council  to 
meet  at  Trent  on  March  15  of  1545. 

Thus  another  stage  is  reached  in  the  settlement  of  Europe.  The 
war  of  1543-5  differs  from  preceding  wars  in  that  the  principal  effort 
was  directed  on  the  Netherlands,  that  an  attempt  was  made  on  both 
sides  to  win  substantial  support  in  Germany,  that  Italy  was  neglected  as 
no  longer  offering  a  favourable  ground  for  attack  in  spite  of  the 
possession  of  Savoy.  It  resembles  the  second  war  in  proving  that 
offensive  operations  on  either  side,  though  in  this  war  more  extensive 
and  determined,  could  not  lead  to  any  permanent  result.  The  solidity 
of  the  several  countries  was  more  abundantly  demonstrated.  The  ugly 
features  of  this  episode  are  on  the  one  hand  the  alliance  of  Francis  with 
the  Turk  and  the  corsairs  of  Barbary,  on  the  other  hand  the  concessions 
of  Charles  to  the  Protestants  of  Germany,  which  involved  either  treason 
to  the  Church  or  the  betrayal  of  his  dupes.  But  some  excuse  must  be 
made  on  the  ground  of  the  extremity  of  his  need.  Charles  was  a  zealous 
Churchman,  but  he  could  not  master  fate.  So  long  as  he  was  opposed 
by  France  and  the  Ottomans,  ill  seconded,  even  thwarted,  by  the  Popes, 
he  could  not  in  addition  take  upon  himself  the  task  of  coercing 
Protestants  in  Germany.  He  and  he  alone  of  the  Princes  in  Europe 
formed  a  just  opinion  of  the  religious  danger,  and  did  his  best  to 
meet  it.  His  desire  for  ecclesiastical  reform  was  frustrated  by  the  blind 
opposition  of  the  Popes.  Toleration  was  forced  upon  him  as  a  political 
necessity.  But  to  sacrifice  the  material  to  the  spiritual  was  a  virtue 
that  lay  beyond  his  ken,  and  one  moreover  ill  suited  to  the  spirit  of  the 
age.  After  all  Charles  was  a  temporal  prince,  and  as  such  his  first  duty 
was  to  the  State  which  he  governed. 

The  Peace  of  Crepy  set  Charles  free  for  the  first  time  in  his  life  to 
intervene  effectually  in  the  affairs  of  Germany.     His  religious  zeal  is 


80  League  hettoeen  Charles  V  and  Paul  III      [1544-6 

attested  by  the  stringent  repressive  measures  Avhich  followed  in  the 
Netherlands,  and  the  Edict  (1544)  which  called  upon  all  his  subjects  in 
the  hereditary  Habsburg  lands  to  conform  to  the  Confession  of  Louvain  — 
the  acts  of  a  bigot  perhaps,  but  a  good  man  cannot  do  more  than  follow 
his  conscience,  and  Charles  was  a  conscientious  Catholic.  His  first  need 
was  to  come  to  an  understanding  with  the  Pope.  Charles  proposed  to 
him  definitely  the  use  of  the  great  sums  accumulated  for  a  crusade 
against  the  Turks  in  a  war  against  the  Protestants,  and  in  support  of 
the  Council.  At  the  Diet  of  Worms  (March,  1545)  the  refusal  of  the 
Protestants  to  be  satisfied  with  a  General  Council  in  which  the  Pope 
would  be  both  party  and  judge  was  openly  declared.  Charles  held  himself 
released  from  his  obligations  to  the  Protestants  by  this  attitude,  though 
indeed  the  proposed  Council  at  Trent  was  very  different  from  that  which 
he  had  promised.  But  the  Pope  still  hung  in  the  wind.  To  win  him 
the  material  must  be  sacrificed  to  the  spiritual  ;  and  the  exact  nature 
of  the  sacrifice  was  made  clear  wlien  Paul  invested  his  son  Pierluigi  with 
Parma  and  Piacenza  (August,  1545)  in  spite  of  the  claims  of  Milan  to 
these  districts,  and  Avithout  the  imperial  sanction.  Still  the  General 
Council  was  actually  opened  at  Trent  in  December,  1545,  after  many 
delays  and  proposals  for  a  removal  to  an  Italian  city,  which  the 
Emperor  emphatically  rejected.  The  choice  of  Trent  was  a  compromise. 
Italian  cities  would  attract  only  Italian  clergy,  who  were  too  much  inter- 
ested in  the  abuses  of  the  Curia.  German  cities  would  be  acceptable 
only  to  the  Germans.  A  truce  was  concluded  with  the  Turks  in  October, 
1545,  on  very  unfavourable  terms.  The  decision  of  Charles  between 
Milan  and  the  Netherlands  as  the  marriage  gift  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans 
had  at  length  been  made  in  March,  1545.  Milan  was  to  be  given 
with  the  second  daughter  of  Ferdinand,  but  the  death  of  the  Duke  of 
Orleans  in  September  relieved  Charles  of  this  necessity. 

Charles  was  thus  free  to  act  in  Germany,  and,  after  the  futile  Religious 
Conference  of  Ratisbon  (1546)  and  the  so-called  Diet  which  followed, 
he  signed  a  treaty  with  the  Pope,  who  pledged  himself  to  send 
12,000  men  to  the  support  of  the  Emperor,  with  a  substantial  subsidy, 
and  to  allow  considerable  levies  from  the  ecclesiastical  resources  of  Spain 
(June  22).  The  Emperor  was  anxious  to  keep  the  terms  of  the  League 
secret,  but  the  Pope  was  eager  that  it  should  be  known,  and  in  letters 
to  the  several  States  he  published  it  at  once,  exhorting  them  to  join. 
But  the  course  of  the  German  war  aroused  once  more  his  fear  and  sus- 
picions. Only  the  obstinate  resistance  of  tlie  Emperor  had  prevented 
the  Pope  from  removing  the  Council  from  Trent  to  some  town  where  he 
could  more  effectively  control  all  its  proceedings.  Many  differences  had 
arisen  over  the  policy  to  be  observed  with  reference  to  the  Council;  the 
Pope  sent  his  troops,  though  not  the  full  number,  and  the  200,000  crowns 
which  he  had  promised  did  not  arrive  ;  difficulties  were  raised  with  regard 
to  the  pledging  of  Church  lands  in  Spain.     The  Emperor  was  obliged  to 


1546-7]  Troubles  in  Italy  81 

raise  money  by  an  agreement  with  the  southern  cities  of  Germany, 
promising  them  religious  liberty.  In  January,  1547,  the  Pope  withdrew 
his  contingent,  the  six  months  for  which  he  had  promised  it  having 
expired.  He  was  intriguing  with  the  French.  In  March,  1547,  the 
Council  was  removed  to  Bologna,  and  the  Spanish  Bishops  refused  to 
follow,  while  Charles  refused  to  recognise  a  Council  at  Bologna.  The 
victory  of  Mtihlberg,  April  23,  1547,  made  Charles'  position  still  more 
formidable.  An  actual  rupture  between  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor 
seemed  probable,  suggested  not  only  by  fear  of  Charles'  exorbitant 
position  in  Europe,  but  by  minor  Italian  interests. 

The  solidity  of  Spanish  power  in  the  Italian  peninsula  was  apparent 
especially  at  this  juncture.  Ferrante  de  Gonzaga,  who  had  been  named 
as  Governor  of  Milan  in  1546,  though  the  appointment  proved 
unfortunate,  secured  at  least  the  support  of  Mantua.  The  Venetian 
policy  grew  more  and  more  cautious,  and  the  greater  this  caution  the 
greater  the  difficulty  of  disturbing  existing  arrangements.  The  policy 
of  Ercole  II  of  Ferrara  was  almost  equally  prudent.  Cosimo  de'  Medici 
showed  himself  the  faithful  servant  of  Charles,  and  in  view  of  his 
watchful  guardianship  troubles  at  Lucca  and  Siena  might  pass  almost 
unnoticed.  Naples  was  in  the  firm  hands  of  Toledo.  Doria  seemed 
safe  at  Genoa,  and  could  be  absolutely  trusted.  Only  the  Pope  showed 
inclinations  to  disturb  the  settled  order,  in  the  interests  of  his  greedy 
Farnese  family.  And  so  long  as  the  other  factors  remained  unchanged 
he  was  powerless  for  serious  harm.  But  in  Italy  revolutions  were 
always  possible. 

The  remarkable  enterprise  of  Francesco  Burlamacchi  directed  from 
Lucca  against  Florence  with  the  aid  of  the  Strozzi  failed  miserably 
(1546).  A  more  dangerous  conspiracy  was  set  on  foot  in  Genoa  by 
Gianluigi  Fiesco.  Gianluigi,  moved  by  the  loss  of  his  own  property, 
jealous  of  the  power  of  the  Doria,  and  taking  advantage  of  the  dis- 
content of  the  people  with  the  constitution  of  1528,  which  gave  all 
the  power  to  the  old  nobility,  had  long  since  entered  into  relations  with 
France  for  the  overthrow  of  the  Doria,  and  the  Spanish  power  resting 
upon  them.  The  possession  of  Genoa  was  the  key  to  the  peninsula,  and 
the  wealth  of  the  Genoese  capitalists  a  mainstay  of  Charles.  On  the 
other  hand  the  immense  debts  owed  by  Charles  to  the  Ligurian 
financiers  secured  for  him  the  support  of  the  moneyed  interest,  but  could 
hardly  prevent  a  sudden  stroke  of  force.  The  Pope  allowed  Fiesco  to 
arrange  for  the  purchase  of  four  of  his  own  galleys,  at  that  time  lying 
in  Civita  Vecchia  (1546).  The  Pope's  relations  with  Doria  were  far 
from  friendly,  apart  from  any  animus  against  the  Emperor. 

The  time  fixed  for  the  attempt  was  the  night  of  January  2,  1547. 
At  ten  o'clock  the  conspirators,  who  had  a  galley  and  300  foot-soldiers 
at  their  disposal,  issued  from  the  palace  of  Fiesco  in  three  bands.  Fiesco 
himself  with  one  made  for  Doria's  galleys,  seized  them,  and  in  the 

C.    M.    H.    II.  6 


82  Deaths  of  Henry  VIII  and  of  Francis  I         [1547 

attempt  to  prevent  the  liberation  of  the  galley-slaves  fell  overboard  and 
was  drowned.  Tiie  two  other  bands  made  for  two  of  the  gates  of  the  city, 
and  at  the  noise  of  the  tumult,  Giannettino,  the  adopted  son  of  Andrea 
Doria,  came  up  and  was  promptly  killed.  Andrea,  however,  escaped  with 
Ins  life,  and  when  the  conspirators  looked  upon  their  work  in  the  morning 
they  discovered  that  their  own  chief  was  missing.  Left  thus  without  unity 
or  direction  tliey  wavered ;  the  Senators  offered  them  an  amnesty  on 
condition  that  they  left  the  city ;  and  the  formidable  plot  resulted  in 
nothing  but  the  re-establishment  of  Doria  and  his  master.  The  amnesty 
was  revoked ;  the  possessions  of  the  conspirators  were  confiscated ;  but 
Doria  succeeded  in  repelling  proposals  for  the  reduction  of  Genoa  under 
direct  Spanish  rule,  and  for  the  erection  of  a  fortress.  Certain  alterations 
were  made  in  the  constitution  for  the  purpose  of  securing  authority  to  the 
partisans  of  Doria,  but  Genoa  retained  at  least  the  forms  of  liberty.  The 
Castle  of  Montobbio,  the  sole  remaining  possession  of  the  Fieschi,  became 
a  danger  for  a  while  ;  but  surrendered  to  the  forces  of  the  Republic  on 
June  11, 1517 ;  and  Doria  succeeded  in  suppressing  other  plots  instigated 
by  Francesco  and  Pierluigi  Farnese. 

The  removal  of  the  Council  from  Trent  came  a  little  too  soon  for 
Charles,  and  it  would  have  been  impossible  for  him  at  that  moment 
to  follow  the  radical  counsel  of  Cosimo  de'  Medici  (February  6,  1547), 
who  advised  him  to  use  his  power  for  a  complete  reform  of  the  Church 
through  the  Council,  taking  away  the  tyranny  of  priests,  reducing  the 
power  of  the  Pope  to  its  proper  spiritual  limits,  and  restoring  the  pure 
faith  of  Christ  without  the  abuses  that  had  grown  up  about  it.  Charles 
was  powerless  to  prevent  the  removal  of  the  Council,  though  its  subse- 
quent adjournment  was  a  concession  to  him.  The  gulf  between  Emperor 
and  Pope  widened  ;  but  neither  of  them  was  anxious  for  an  open  rupture. 
Henry  VIII  had  died  on  January  28,  and  Francis  I  on  March  31,  1547; 
and  the  whole  scheme  of  European  policy  was  likely  to  undergo  revision. 
The  Pope  would  not  move  until  he  was  sure  of  support ;  and  Charles  was 
too  busy  in  Germany  to  w^ish  to  provoke  complications  in  the  peninsula. 
Henry  II  of  France  showed  friendly  inclinations  towards  Paul,  but  gave 
him  no  more  definite  assurance  of  friendship  than  a  promise  of  the  hand 
of  his  natural  daughter  for  Orazio  Farnese.  From  England  under 
Somerset  nothing  was  to  be  hoped.  The  negotiations  of  the  Pope  with 
Charles  still  turned  on  the  investiture  of  Parma  and  Piacenza,  and  the 
addition  of  Siena,  as  much  as  upon  the  question  of  the  Council.  Charles 
was  determined  that  no  session  should  be  held  at  Bologna;  and  although 
the  Pope  had  set  out  to  preside  over  a  solemn  session  intended  as  pre- 
paratory to  the  close  of  the  Council,  Diego  de  Mendoza,  the  Emperor's 
envoy,  had  succeeded  in  procuring  a  further  postponement,  when  a  series 
of  unexpected  events  changed  the  whole  situation.  The  aspect  of  Naples 
and  Siena  was  threatening,  but  tlie  cloud  burst  in  Piacenza. 

The  progress  of  heretical  opinions  in  Naples  was  notorious;  and  in 


1545-8]     Murder  of  Pierluigi  Farnese  at  Piacenza  83 

May  Paul  bad  sent  a  commissary  to  the  kingdom,  with  a  brief  which 
hinted  at  the  establishment  of  the  Inquisition.  A  rebellion  at  once 
followed;  and  the  small  Spanish  garrison  was  in  difficulties.  But  the 
prompt  and  judicious  measures  of  Toledo,  and  the  assurance  of  Charles 
liimself  that  he  had  no  intention  of  introducing  the  Inquisition  or  of 
allowing  it  to  be  introduced,  soon  restored  order  ;  yet  an  uneasy  feeling 
remained  that  the  brief  had  been  sent  with  the  secret  intention  of 
provoking  revolt.  Siena  had  already  in  1545  risen  in  arms  against  the 
imperial  commissioner,  Juan  de  Luna,  and  the  3Ionte  dei  Wove,  whom  he 
supported,  and  had  driven  out  the  Spanish  garrison.  Cosinio  succeeded 
in  preventing  any  great  excesses,  but  Francesco  Grassi,  whom  Charles 
sent  from  Milan  to  appease  discontent,  failed  to  effect  a  compromise. 
The  citizens  took  up  arms  again  and  accepted  the  protection  of  the 
Pope,  protesting  against  any  foreign  garrison,  and  excluding  the  Noveschi 
from  any  share  in  the  government.  Cosimo,  however,  succeeded  in 
procuring  the  acceptance  of  his  own  mediation,  and  on  September  28 
a  garrison  of  Spaniards  was  admitted.  Mendoza  arrived  in  October, 
restored  the  Noveschi,  and  set  up  as  before  a  governing  body  of  forty, 
ten  from  each  Monte,  but  insisted  on  naming  the  half  of  them  himself 
(November,  1548). 

In  Piacenza  the  rule  of  Pierluigi  Farnese  was  hated.  His  measures 
for  reducing  the  nobility  to  obedience,  by  depriving  them  of  their 
privileges  and  forcing  them  to  live  in  the  city,  though  salutary,  made 
him  many  enemies.  Private  wrongs  increased  their  number.  Gonzaga, 
who  represented  the  forward  policyin  Italy,  was  anxious  to  take  advantage 
of  the  troubles  at  Genoa  and  Siena  to  establish  direct  Spanish  rule 
over  those  cities,  and  the  discontent  at  Piacenza  was  much  to  his  mind. 
Aware  of  the  hostile  movements  directed  against  him,  and  of  the  support 
given  by  Gonzaga  from  Milan  to  his  assailants,  Pierluigi  prepared  to 
defend  himself  by  the  building  of  a  fortress  at  Piacenza.  This  accelerated 
the  blow  which  had  been  long  prepared  by  Gonzaga.  On  September  10, 
1547,  the  conspirators  took  up  arms  ;  Pierluigi  was  killed  in  his  palace  ; 
and  the  city  was  in  the  power  of  the  rebels.  Gonzaga's  promptitude  is  a 
sufficient  proof  of  his  complicity.  On  the  12th  he  entered  the  city,  and 
occupied  it  in  the  name  of  Spain.  Of  the  projects  of  his  minister 
Charles  had  been  sufficiently  informed,  and,  although  he  had  counselled 
j)rudence,  he  had  not  discouraged  the  enterprise.  It  was  an  act  of 
open  war  against  the  Pope,  wounding  him  where  he  was  most  sensitive. 
Charles  de  Guise,  the  newly  elected  Cardinal,  ajjpeared  at  Rome  ia 
October,  and  this  seemed  to  give  the  Pope  his  opportunity  of  revenge. 
Conditions  for  a  league  with  France  were  drawn  up  ;  Parma  and  Piacenza 
were  to  be  given  to  Orazio  Farnese,  not  to  Ottavio,  the  Emperor's 
son-in-law ;  the  King  was  to  supply  troops  for  the  defence  of  the  Papal 
States  ;  French  bishops  were  to  attend  the'  Council  at  Bologna ;  the 
Pope  was  to  contribute  7000  men,  if  the  King  was  to  be  attacked  in  his 


84  The  poUcy  of  Gonzaga  and  Mendoza         [1547-9 

own  States.  The  projected  league  like  many  others,  though  ostensibly 
defensive,  was  really  intended  for  offence. 

The  Diet  of  Augsburg  (^15-iT)  gave  Charles  a  lever  in  his  negotiations. 
He  was  able  to  offer  the  submission  of  all  Germany  to  the  Council 
as  a  price  for  its  retiu-n  to  Trent.  But  the  Pope  referred  the  decision 
to  the  Fathers  at  Bologna,  who  decided  in  favour  of  that  city.  Charles 
could  do  nothing  but  enter  a  solemn  protest  before  the  assembly  at 
Bologna  and  in  the  Consistory  (January,  1548)  ;  and  the  Spanish  Bishops 
remained  at  Trent.  Negotiations  continued  while  the  Council  remained 
in  effect  suspended.  Threats  made  by  the  Pope  of  an  attack  upon 
Naples  came  to  nothing,  and  a  fresh  plot  conducted  by  Giulio  Cibo 
against  Genoa  failed.  On  the  other  hand  Henry  II  was  not  satisfied 
with  the  terms  of  the  league  offered  b}-  the  Pope.  Meanwhile  France 
was  arming :  the  Pope  was  arming :  and  Charles  put  his  possessions  in 
a  state  of  defence.  Cosimo  de'  Medici  occupied  Elba  and  Piombino 
for  the  further  defence  of  his  coasts  in  the  imperial  interest.  The 
remonstrances,  however,  of  the  Genoese,  who  feared  an  attack  upon 
Corsica,  led  Charles  to  take  these  places  into  his  own  hands.  The  visit 
of  Henry  II  to  Savoy  and  Piedmont  (May,  1548)  proved  to  be  no  more 
than  a  reconnaissance  in  force  and  led  only  to  the  seizure  of  the 
Marquisate  of  Saluzzo.  Further  delay  was  caused  by  the  French  war 
with  England  which  broke  out  in  1548  over  the  Scottish  question,  and 
the  Pope's  revenge  had  to  be  postponed.  The  Interim  (May,  1548) 
agrees  with  the  tone  of  general  European  politics  at  the  time.  Ever}- 
Power  was  seeking  to  enjoy  the  benefits  of  time,  and  in  such  a  policy 
Charles  was  a  master. 

And  so  the  stormy  year  1547  passed  into  the  sullen  peace  of 
1548,  while  the  Pope  was  still  off'ering  ecclesiastical  concessions  as  the 
price  for  the  restitution  of  Piacenza,  and  Charles  replied  by  asserting 
his  right  not  only  to  Piacenza  but  to  Parma  also.  Gonzaga  continued 
to  push  his  adventurous  plans  upon  the  Emperor,  and  hoped  to  take 
advantage  of  the  passage  of  the  Archduke  Philip  through  Northern 
Italy  in  the  autumn  of  1548,  at  least  to  secure  the  building  of  a  castle 
in  Genoa  :  but  nothing  could  be  done  except  by  force,  and  the  Emperor 
was  above  all  anxious  to  preserve  the  existing  equipoise,  as  is  shown  by 
his  instructions  to  Philip,  written  in  February,  1548.  With  Gonzaga 
was  co-operating  Mendoza;  he  increased  his  personal  authority  over 
Siena,  disarmed  the  citizens,  and  finally  proposed  the  erection  of  a  castle. 
The  Pope  proceeded  with  his  negotiations  with  France,  and  although 
he  allowed  certain  ecclesiastical  concessions  to  be  extorted  from  him, 
nothing  certain  resulted.  The  affairs  of  the  Council  became  more  and 
more  desperate  :  and  finally,  in  September,  1549,  the  order  came  to 
suspend  it.  The  proposal  to  give  Parma  to  Orazio  Farnese  or  to 
incorporate  it  with  the  domains  of  the  Church  had  alienated  Ottavio  ; 
who,  after  a  futUe  attempt  to  seize  the  city,  took  refuge  with  Gonzaga. 


1549-51]  Accession  of  Pope  Julius  III  85 

Paul  III  died  on  November  10,  1549,  his  last  days  embittered  by  dis- 
sension with  his  family,  whose  adyancement  had  been  his  chief  thought, 
and  for  whom  he  had  sacrificed  the  friendship  of  the  Emperor  and  the 
interests  of  the  Church.  His  last  act  was  to  sign  an  order  to  place 
Parma  in  Ottayio's  hands ;  but  the  Orsini,  who  were  holding  the  town, 
refused  compliance. 

The  Conclaye  which  followed  was  unusually  prolonged.  The  imperial 
party,  with  whom  the  Farnese  party  made  common  cause  in  the  hopes 
of  winning  Parma  at  least,  if  not  Piacenza.  for  the  family,  were  in  a 
majority,  and  aimed  at  the  election  of  Pole  or  the  Cardinal  Juan  de 
Toledo,  both  known  to  be  well  disposed  towards  ecclesiastical  reform. 
But  the  French  party,  though  not  able  to  elect  any  of  their  own  can- 
didates, were  fully  able  to  prevent  the  election  of  any  other ;  and,  after 
the  Conclave  had  lasted  more  than  two  months,  the  two  parties  agreed 
to  elect  the  Cardinal  del  Monte,  who  took  the  name  of  Julius  III 
(February  7,  1550).  Although  his  sympathies  on  the  whole  had  been 
French,  although  he  had  been  associated  with  the  removal  of  the  Council 
to  Bologna,  although  he  had  the  reputation  of  frivolity  and  vice,  the 
imperial  party  accepted  him  as  likely  to  choose  tranquillity  rather  than 
war  and  intrigue.  Tranquillity  meant  the  continued  domination  of 
Spain.  His  good  disposition  towards  the  Emperor  soon  became  evident 
in  a  number  of  matters,  trifling  in  themselves,  but  important  in  the 
aggregate.  ]SIore  important  still  was  the  intention  which  he  soon 
announced  of  reopening  the  Council  at  Trent.  In  fact,  on  November  14, 
1550,  he  published  a  Bull  summoning  the  Council  to  meet  at  Trent  in 
the  following  May,  notwithstanding  the  opposition  of  France,  and  the  im- 
possibility of  settling  the  conditions  in  accordance  with  the  wishes  of  the 
Emperor,  the  demands  of  the  German  Diets,  and  the  interests  of  the  Curia. 

Julius  had  restored  Ottavio  Farnese  to  Parma  in  fulfilment  of 
promises  made  in  the  Conclave,  but  he  could  not  effectually  protect 
him  against  the  hostilities  of  Gonzaga  from  Milan.  Nor  could  he 
persuade  Charles  to  restore  to  his  son-in-law  Piacenza  also.  On  the 
contrary  the  pressure  of  Gonzaga  on  the  borders  of  Parma  and  his 
intrigues  within  the  Duchy  drove  Farnese  to  apply  for  aid  from 
France  (December,  1550).  Terms  were  arranged  with  France,  and 
Ottavio  passed  into  the  ser^-ice  of  Henry.  The  King  assembled  troops 
at  Mirandola.  The  Emperor  pressed  for  a  sentence  of  confiscation 
against  Ottavio,  and  offered  a  loan  to  enable  Julius  to  carry  it  out. 
Gonzaga  seized  Brescello  (to  the  north-east  of  Parma)  from  the  Cardinal 
d'Este.  The  Pope  hesitated,  but  finally  decided  that  it  was  more 
dangerous  to  offend  the  Emperor,  and  (^lay,  1551)  declared  Ottavio 
deprived  of  his  fief.  It  then  became  necessary  to  resort  to  force,  and 
Giambattista  del  Monte,  the  Pope's  nephew  in  command  of  the  papal 
troops,  received  orders  to  co-operate  with  Gonzaga  in  the  occupation 
of  the  Parmesan  (June). 


86  War  with  the  Turks  and  with  France       [i550-l 

The  war  opened  badly.  On  his  way  to  join  Gonzaga  Giambattista 
suffered  a  slight  reverse.  Bolognese  territory  was  attacked  by  the 
Farnesi,  and  the  safety  of  Bologna  itself  was  doubtful.  The  Pope  was 
anxious  to  protect  Bologna  and  called  off  the  chief  part  of  his  troops  for 
its  defence.  Reinforcements  reached  Parma  from  Mirandola.  Although 
Mirandola  was  under  French  protection  it  became  necessary  to  attack 
it,  and  the  double  enterprise  against  Parma  and  Mirandola  proved  too 
much  for  the  scanty  forces.  The  country  was  ruined  but  nothing  was 
effected.  War  had  not  yet  opened  between  the  French  King  and  the 
Emperor,  but  the  peace  concluded  with  England  by  Henry  II  (March  24, 
1550)  by  which  Boulogne  was  restored  for  a  money  payment,  left  him  free 
on  that  side  ;  and  he  could  choose  his  own  moment  for  overt  hostilities. 

Meanwhile  the  truce  between  Charles  and  the  Sultan  had  been 
broken.  A  new  corsair,  Dragut,  had  established  himself  on  the  Tunisian 
coast  of  Africa  at  Mehedia,  known  as  the  Port  of  Africa.  His  ravages 
on  the  neighbouring  littoral  of  Sicily  and  further  afield  had  rendered 
action  imperative ;  and  in  September,  1550,  the  united  fleet  of  Charles' 
dominions  had  attacked  and  captured  his  headquarters,  though  his  fleet 
escaped  on  this  occasion,  and  again  from  Doria's  blockade  in  the 
following  spring.  Charles  could  represent  that  this  act  of  reprisal  had 
been  abundantly  provoked,  but  the  Sultan  had  made  Dragut  his  com- 
missioner to  rule  over  the  whole  of  Barbary,  and  regarded  the  attack 
upon  him  as  an  attack  upon  himself.  On  his  return  from  an  expedition 
against  the  Sophy  of  Persia,  which  the  truce  with  Charles  had  permitted, 
the  Sultan  prepared  for  war.  In  July,  1551,  a  great  Turkish  fleet 
appeared  in  Sicilian  waters,  and  after  vainly  demanding  the  restoration 
of  Mehedia,  the  Ottomans  turned  upon  the  Knights  of  St  John,  and 
captured  Tripoli  (August  11).  In  September  of  the  same  year  the 
Turkish  war  began  afresh  in  Hungary.  Once  more  Charles  had  to 
withstand  the  simultaneous  hostility  of  the  Most  Christian  King  and 
of  the  infidels.  In  the  course  of  1551  Henry  was  submitting  plans  for 
common  action  to  tlie  Porte,  and  the  use  of  the  Turkish  fleet  was 
recommended  ;  war  in  Hungary  being  calculated  to  unite  the  Germans 
in  defence.  The  King  of  France  was  also  in  relations  with  Magdeburg 
and  with  Maurice  of  Saxony. 

Under  these  auspices  the  Council  met  once  more  at  Trent  in  May, 
1551,  though  it  was  autumn  before  formal  proceedings  could  be  begun. 
Its  prospects  were  not  rosy,  for  in  September,  1551,  war  opened  on  the 
side  of  Savoy.  Although  Frangois  de  Brissac,  the  French  commander, 
did  not  push  his  attack,  the  necessity  of  action  in  two  distant  fields 
completely  disorganised  the  imperial  finances  in  Italy.  The  blockades 
of  Parma  and  Mirandola  were  in  consequence  slackly  pursued  ;  the  Pope 
saw  little  prospect  of  gain  from  the  war ;  his  debts  were  burdensome  ; 
French  hostility  threatened  him  with  the  failure  of  French  funds ;  he 
began  to  think  whether  an  arrangement  with  France  was  not  possible. 


1551-3]     French  occupation  of  the  Lorraine  bishoprics      87 

In  April,  1552,  he  concluded  a  truce  with  France,  which  allowed  Ottavio 
Farnese  to  hold  Parma  unmolested  for  two  years.  About  the  same  time 
the  Pope's  nephew,  Giambattista,  died  in  action.  Charles  was  fain  to 
accept  the  truce,  for  the  same  reason  which  mainly  influenced  the  final 
decision  of  the  Pope ;  the  rising  of  Maurice  of  Saxony  in  alliance  with 
the  French,  and  the  news  of  a  French  invasion.  A  fresh  advance  of  the 
Turks  in  September,  1551,  was  another  of  the  intolerable  burdens  which 
Charles  had  to  bear  at  this,  the  darkest  moment  of  his  life. 

The  alliance  between  Henry  II  of  France  and  the  Protestant  Princes 
of  Germany  was  concluded  at  Chambord  on  January  15,  1552.  It 
opened  the  way  for  a  new  development  of  French  policy,  the  acquisition 
of  territory,  not  Burgundian,  at  the  expense  of  the  Empire.  On 
March  13,  1552,  Henry  invaded  Lorraine,  took  the  government  from 
the  Duchess  and  her  infant  son,  and,  in  accordance  with  his  agreement 
with  the  Protestant  princes,  occupied  the  principal  towns  of  the  three 
great  bishoj^rics  of  Toul,  Metz,  and  Verdun. 

Since  the  accession  of  Rene  de  Vaudemont  the  power  of  the  Dukes 
had  been  consolidated  in  the  Duchy  of  Lorraine,  by  the  extension  of 
their  influence  over  the  Bishoprics,  and  the  election  of  relations  or 
partisans  to  the  several  Sees.  But  the  policy  of  the  duchy  in  the  wars 
between  France  and  Burgundy  had  been  to  preserve  neutrality  as  far  as 
possible  ;  and  thus  up  to  this  time  immunity  had  been  secured.  The 
marriage  of  Christina,  the  Emperor's  niece,  to  the  heir  of  Lorraine  in 
1540  had  not  during  the  life  of  her  husband  disturbed  this  neutrality  ; 
but  Christina  had  been  recently  left  a  widow,  and  her  regency  in  the 
duchy  gave  a  plausible  excuse  for  French  intervention.  Lorraine  was 
easily,  subdued,  but  an  attempt  to  seize  Strassburg  failed.  The  Nether- 
land  forces  created  a  diversion  by  invading  France  and  devastating 
Champagne  ;  and  Henry  replied  by  marching  on  Luxemburg  and  occu- 
pying the  southern  part  of  the  duchy. 

The  Emperor  had  hoped  before  the  crisis  arrived  in  German}'-  to 
reach  the  Netherlands,  but  his  way  was  barred  by  the  confederates  ;  in 
Innsbruck  he  was  not  safe,  and  he  was  a  fugitive  at  Villach  in  Carinthia, 
while  the  French  worked  their  will  in  Lorraine  and  Luxemburg.  But 
in  August,  1552,  after  the  confederates  had  been  brought  to  terms,  he 
issued  once  more  with  an  army,  and  passing  through  Southern  Germany, 
was  well  received  at  Strassburg,  which  had  refused  to  admit  the  French. 
Thence  notwithstanding  the  lateness  of  the  season  he  proceeded  to  the 
siege  of  Metz,  which  meanwhile  had  been  strongly  fortified  by  Frangois, 
Due  de  Guise,  and  was  ready  to  hold  out.  In  spite  of  Charles'  dis- 
creditable alliance  with  Margrave  Albert  Alcibiades  of  Brandenburg- 
Culmbach,  the  siege,  which  did  not  begin  until  October,  proved  a  complete 
failure,  and  on  January  1,  1553,  Charles  had  to  order  a  retreat.  These 
events  had  their  reaction  on  the  Council  of  Trent,  which  was  suspended 
in  April,  1552,  for  two  years  or  until  the  troubles  should  be  overpast. 


88  Revolt  and  conquest  of  Siena  [1552-5 

That  no  more  general  rising  took  place  in  Italy  during  the  months 
when  Charles  was  suffering  the  invasion  of  Lorraine,  and  afterwards 
flying  from  Innsbruck  before  his  enemies,  is  a  remarkable  testimony  to 
the  solidity  of  the  edifice  which  he  had  built  up.  Charles  contributed 
indeed  to  this  result  by  abandoning  the  forward  policy  and  its  agents. 
Mendoza  was  recalled,  and  Gonzaga  was  removed  from  the  government 
of  Milan.  There  were  not  wanting  centres  of  disaffection.  Ferrara 
was  French,  even  Cosimo  wavered,  Siena,  irritated  by  the  castle  which 
Charles  was  building  outside  the  walls  by  the  advice  of  Mendoza,  burst 
into  open  rebellion  (July  17,  1552)  ;  but  Cosimo  was  able  to  isolate  the 
conflagration,  and  although  the  Spanish  garrison  was  driven  out  and 
the  fortress  levelled  the  rebellion  did  not  spread.  It  was  agreed  that 
Siena  should  remain  free  under  imperial  protection,  and  foreign  forces 
should  be  excluded.  Nevertheless  French  troops  garrisoned  the  city,  the 
fortifications  were  strengthened,  and  the  Cardinal  of  Ferrara  assumed 
the  government  in  the  French  interest.  The  Spanish  government  had 
to  acquiesce  for  the  present  and  wait  for  its  time  to  come.  An  attempt 
in  January,  1553,  to  subdue  the  city  by  force  from  Naples  failed  owing 
to  the  death  of  Toledo,  and  the  recall  of  his  son,  who  was  commanding 
the  army. 

In  1554,  however,  Cosimo  gave  the  word  for  more  energetic  action. 
Piero  Strozzi,  the  ubiquitous  opponent  of  Medici  and  Habsburg,  had 
entered  the  city  in  January.  During  his  temporary  absence  Florentine 
troops  surprised  a  gate  of  the  city.  Nevertheless  Siena  held  out  for  fif- 
teen months,  the  besieging  army  being  commanded  by  that  successful  ad- 
venturer, Gian  Giacomo  Medichino,  Marquis  of  Marignano;  while  Blaise 
de  Montluc  governed  the  city  for  the  French  King  and  Strozzi  showed 
great  ability  and  resource  in  frequent  raids  and  sallies.  But  Strozzi's 
total  defeat  at  Marciano  on  August  2,  1554,  rendered  it  possible  to 
complete  the  blockade,  and  in  April,  1555,  the  city  surrendered  to  famine. 
The  irreconcilables  held  out  for  four  years  longer  at  Montalcino,  but 
the  issue  was  no  longer  doubtful.  The  city  was  given  up  by  Philip  to 
Cosimo  (1557),  and  incorporated  in  his  duchy  of  Tuscany.  The 
Spaniards  retained,  however,  the  coast  towns  (the  Presidi).  Piombino 
and  Elba  Cosimo  had  already  received.  So  ended  the  last  of  the  old- 
fashioned  revolutions  of  Italy,  and  one  more  single  and  independent  city 
was  incorporated  in  the  larger  system.  Cosimo  was  a  main  link  in  the 
Italian  scheme  of  Charles,  and  the  accessions  of  territory  which  he 
received  were  well  earned  by  his  services  to  the  Habsburg  cause. 

Meanwhile  the  French  and  Turkish  fleets  had  been  co-operating  in 
the  Mediterranean,  raiding  the  Italian  coasts.  They  then  provoked  a 
rebellion  in  Corsica,  which  at  first  had  considerable  success,  but  ultimately 
with  Spanish  and  German  aid  the  Genoese  recovered  the  principal  fort- 
resses, and  the  Treaty  of  Cateau-Cambr^sis  restored  the  island  to  Genoa. 

The  war  on  the  French  frontier  continued  its  indecisive  course.     In 


1553-6]  Close  of  Charles''  career  89 

June,  1553,  Charles  had  his  first  success.  Terouanne  was  attacked  in 
April,  and  after  two  months  capitulated  with  its  garrison  of  3000  men, 
and  Montmorency's  eldest  son.  Emmanuel  Philibert,  who  in  this  same 
year  succeeded  his  father  as  Duke  of  Savoy,  took  and  destroyed  Hesdin. 
Robert  de  la  Marck,  whose  hostilities  had  first  involved  the  Emperor  in 
war  (1522),  was  a  captive.  An  attack  on  Cambray  by  the  French  King 
failed.  In  the  following  year  the  French  changed  their  objective  to  the 
valley  of  the  Meuse,  capturing  Marienburg,  Dinant,  and  Bouvines.  To 
resist  them  two  new  fortresses,  Charlemont  and  Philippeville,  were  built 
on  the  territory  of  Liege.  The  defence  of  Namur  by  Charles  in  person 
ended  his  fighting  days  with  credit.  Almost  his  last  act  of  authority 
was  to  conclude  the  short-lived  Truce  of  Vaucelles  (February  5,  1556). 

The  close  of  Charles'  career  is  characteristic.  A  long  campaign 
against  odds  in  which  reverses  were  fully  compensated  by  success;  the 
marriage  of  Philip  with  Mary  of  England  (July  25,  1554),  conceived  in 
the  true  Habsburg  spirit;  the  completion  and  final  consolidation  of  his 
work  in  Italy;  the  Religious  Peace  of  Augsburg,  in  which  Charles  was 
forced  by  political  necessity  to  acquiesce,  against  his  will  and  against  his 
convictions.  His  work  was  done.  During  forty  years  he  had  striven 
to  discharge  the  impossible  tasks  imposed  upon  him  by  accident  and  a 
mistaken  dynastic  policy.  He  had  now  accomplished  what  he  could 
perform.  The  duchy  of  Milan  and  preponderance  in  Italy  was  a  set-off 
for  the  lost  duchy  of  Burgundy.  The  conquest  of  Lorraine  he  could 
regard  as  a  wrong  done  not  to  himself  but  to  others.  The  acquisition 
of  this  duchy  would  have  tempted  him  had  he  resembled  his  ancestor 
Charles  the  Bold.  It  does  not  however  appear  that  he  ever  contemplated 
such  a  conquest,  a  proof  of  his  essentially  conservative  policy.  He  had 
given  peace  to  Italy  and  Germany;  at  the  price  of  much  that  was 
valuable,  much  that  could  never  be  restored,  but  still  he  had  given 
peace.  The  accession  of  Paul  IV  (May  23, 1555)  gave  reason  to  believe 
that  this  peace  might  be  disturbed;  but  its  ultimate  restoration  could 
be  confidently  expected.  The  late  war  had  shown  the  strong  defensive 
position  in  Italy  and  the  Netherlands;  a  position  so  strong  that  the  main 
French  attack  had  been  diverted  from  Charles'  hereditary  possessions  to 
the  neighbouring  independent  and  weaker  powers.  Spain  as  usual  was 
regarded  as  inexpugnable.  With  the  Reformation  alone  he  had  proved 
unable  to  cope.  It  was  an  accomplished  fact,  but  he  had  given  it 
bounds,  and  extinguished  in  Germany  religious  war. 

The  question  of  Savoy  still  remained  unsolved,  but  this  he  could 
leave  to  his  son  to  settle.  So  long  as  France  still  held  Savoy  and 
Piedmont  she  held  the  gates  of  Italy ;  and  Spanish  garrisons  in  Milan 
had  to  be  maintained  almost  at  war-strength.  But  something  must  be 
left  undone  ;  and  Charles  had  the  right  to  demand  his  release.  Although 
he  was  still  young,  as  we  measure  youth,  his  incessant  labours  had 
destroyed  his  health.     He  was  racked  with   gout,  the  penalty  of  his 


90  Electio7i  of  Poi:>e  Paul  IV  [1555-6 

voracious  appetite  and  unsparing  industry.  His  abdication,  although 
it  has  often  been  regarded  with  surprise,  was  the  most  natural  act,  and 
the  moment  for  it  well  chosen.  In  the  Netherlands  it  was  accompanied 
by  a  touching  and  impressive  ceremony  (October  25,  1555),  when,  in 
the  midst  of  a  splendid  assembly  at  Brussels,  the  Emperor  with  tears 
explained  his  reasons,  recounted  his  labours,  and  gave  his  last  ex- 
hortation ;  and  then  solemnly  invested  his  son  with  his  Northern 
provinces.  Milan  and  Naples  had  been  previously  handed  over.  On 
January  16,  1556,  Charles  resigned  his  Spanish  kingdoms  and  Sicily. 
Shortly  afterwards  he  gave  up  the  Franche-Comte.  He  made  over  to 
his  brother  all  his  imperial  authority,  though  his  formal  renunciation  of 
the  Empire  was  not  accomplished  until  1558.  Free  at  last  he  set  sail 
for  Spain  (September  17,  1556)  and  made  his  way  to  the  monastery  at 
Yuste.  Here  he  took  a  constant  interest  in  the  political  affairs  of  the 
time,  and  occasionally  intervened  by  way  of  advice  and  influence.  After 
two  years  of  rest,  broken  by  increasing  infirmity,  he  closed  his  life  in 
1558  ;  too  soon  to  see  the  seal  set  upon  his  labours  by  the  Treaty  of 
Cateau-Cambr^sis. 

Julius  III  had  concluded  on  March  24, 1555,  his  insignificant  career  ; 
Marcellus  II,  his  successor,  died  on  April  30  ;  and  on  May  23  Giampiero 
Caraffa  was  elected,  and  took  the  title  of  Paul  IV.  The  ecclesiastical 
activity  of  Caraffa,  his  share  in  the  endeavour  to  restore  pontifical  and 
hierarchical  authority  in  the  years  previous  to  his  election  as  Pope,  his 
religious  attitude  and  tendencies,  do  not  concern  us  here.  But  the  spirit 
shown  by  Caraffa  in  the  treatment  of  heretics,  and  the  affairs  of  the 
Church,  promised  little  peace  if  it  were  to  be  applied  to  the  complicated 
political  relations  of  the  papal  see.  What  all  expected  to  see  was  an 
uncompromising  postponement  of  political  expediency  to  the  single 
object  of  restoring  papal  supremacy  and  ecclesiastical  unity.  What 
none  could  have  foreseen  was  that  not  only  the  political  interests  of  the 
Holy  See  but  also  all  chances  of  an  effective  Catholic  reaction  were  to  be 
sacrificed  to  the  demands  of  intense  personal  hatred. 

It  was  known  that  Caraffa  was  an  enemy  of  Spain.  As  a  Neapolitan, 
he  detested  the  alien  masters  of  his  native  country.  In  1547  he  had 
urged  upon  Paul  III  an  attack  on  Naples  in  support  of  the  rising  which 
had  then  occurred  in  the  kingdom  ;  and  it  had  subsequently  required  all 
the  influence  of  Julius  to  procure  his  admission  to  the  Archbishopric  of 
Naples.  But  the  overmastering  nature  of  his  hatred  was  not  known,  and 
is  even  now  not  completely  to  be  explained.  If  we  assume  that  personal 
grounds  of  animosity  co-operated  with  intense  hatred  of  foreign  rule,  a 
despairing  sense  that  one  last  blow  must  be  struck  to  free  the  Papacy 
once  and  for  all  from  Spanish  domination,  and  a  stern  conscientious 
antipathy  to  those  methods  of  compromise  with  heretics  which  had  been 
the  chief  mark  of  Charles'  action  in  religious  matters — if  we  assume  that 
all  these  feelings  worked  together,  each  intensifying  and  exacerbating 


1555-7]  War  between  Paul  IV  and  Philip  II  91 

the  other,  then  we  can  perhaps  begin  to  understand  the  attitude  of  Paul. 
In  addition  his  advanced  age  (he  was  79  years  old  at  the  time  of  his 
election)  admitted  of  no  delay;  what  was  to  be  done  must  be  done 
quickly;  and  the  history  of  the  Papacy  can  prove  that  old  age  exercises 
no  mitigating  influence  over  the  passions  of  anger  and  hatred. 

The  forces  with  which  Paul  entered  on  this  struggle  were  in 
themselves  insignificant.  The  total  gross  revenues  of  the  Papal  State 
about  this  time  are  estimated  at  1,000,000  crowns;  from  which  sum 
400,000  crowns  must  be  at  once  deducted  for  taxation  remitted  by 
Caraffa  and  necessary  current  expenses.  The  ecclesiastical  revenues  had 
been  reduced  by  the  apostasy  of  Germany,  the  practical  independence 
of  Spain,  the  condition  of  England,  and  by  the  austere  refusal  of 
the  Pope  himself  to  allow  money  to  be  raised  by  questionable  means 
employed  in  the  past.  The  papal  troops  were  inefficient  even  if  judged 
by  an  Italian  standard;  the  population  was  neither  prosperous  nor 
devoted;  and  there  were  permanent  centres  of  sedition  and  opposition. 

Paul  set  himself  at  once  to  gain  external  help.  Ferrara  joined;  a 
league  was  concluded  at  Rome  with  France,  which  was  represented  by 
Charles  de  Guise,  tlie  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  December  16,  1555;  but 
Venice  as  usual  maintained  a  watchful  neutrality.  But  his  policy  of 
enriching  his  nephews  by  confiscation  of  the  goods  of  Roman  nobles, 
while  it  agreed  ill  with  the  zeal  for  reform  and  justice  hitherto  professed 
by  the  Pope,  gained  him  many  enemies  at  home.  The  conclusion  of  the 
Truce  of  Vaucelles  (February,  1556)  was  a  disappointment  to  Paul;  but 
his  able  and  unscrupulous  ne])hew.  Cardinal  Carlo  Caraffa,  succeeded 
during  the  summer  in  persuading  Henry  II  to  renew  the  league  for 
defensive  purposes.  The  seizure  and  imprisonment  of  Garcilasso  della 
Vega,  the  secretary  of  the  Spanish  embassy  at  Rome,  was  a  measure 
of  open  hostility;  and  the  Duke  of  Alva,  who  had  succeeded  Toledo  at 
Naples,  was  forced  to  address  a  remonstrance,  almost  an  ultimatum,  to 
the  Pope  in  August,  1556.  No  satisfaction  was  to  be  expected ;  and  in 
September  the  Spanish  troops  crossed  the  frontier  and  began  to  occupy 
the  Campagna.  The  Pope,  ill  prepared  for  war,  was  forced  to  beg  for 
an  armistice,  which  was  granted  (December  2,  1556).  He  used  the 
interval  to  call  on  his  ally  for  help ;  and  before  the  month  was  out  the 
Duke  of  Guise  crossed  the  Alps.  Instead  of  allowing  him  to  proceed  to 
the  reduction  of  Milan,  Paul  insisted  on  his  pressing  on  through  papal 
territory  to  Naples.  The  passage  of  the  French  troops  increased  the 
discontent  of  the  papal  subjects  in  Romagna  and  the  Marches,  which 
had  already  been  aroused  by  the  extraordinary  subsidies  required  for  the 
war.  The  papal  troops  were  melting  away  for  want  of  pay;  and  when 
the  allied  armies  crossed  the  Neapolitan  frontier  and  laid  siege  to 
Civitella,  they  were  soon  compelled  to  withdraw.  In  August,  1557,  the 
news  of  the  battle  of  St  Quentin  caused  the  recall  of  Guise,  and  the  Pope 
was  left  without  defence. 


92  Death  of  Paul  IV. — Battle  of  St  Quentin      [1557-9 

Alva  could  easily  have  taken  Rome  if  he  had  wished,  but  neither  he 
nor  his  master  wished  to  reduce  the  Pope  to  extremities.  The  Pope  was 
forced  to  beg  for  peace,  which  was  granted  on  easy  terms.  The  only 
serious  concession  required  was  the  restoration  to  the  Colonna  and  other 
friends  of  Spain  of  the  property  which  had  been  taken  from  them  and 
conferred  upon  the  papal  nephews.  The  Spanish  hegemony  in  the 
peninsula  stood  firmer  than  ever,  but  the  Papal  State  was  not  curtailed. 
Alva  visited  Paul  at  Rome,  and  was  reconciled  to  the  Pope  (September, 
1557). 

After  this  brief  and  fruitless  exposition  of  hatred,  Paul  returned 
rebuked  to  his  work  of  ecclesiastical  reformation  and  the  stimulation  of 
the  Inquisition.  That  action  of  the  Inquisition  was  frequently  directed 
by  political  motives  was  generally  believed  at  the  time,  and  is  not  in 
itself  improbable.  Partly  to  quell  the  resentment  caused  by  this  and 
other  measures,  partl}^  perhaps  to  indicate  the  recognition  and  abandon- 
ment of  a  mistaken  policy,  Paul  (January,  1559)  deprived  his  nephews 
of  all  their  offices  and  banished  them  from  Rome.  This  act  of  justice 
was  however  only  the  preliminary  to  the  enforcement  of  still  sterner 
measures  of  religious  repression  ;  and  when  the  Pope  expired  in  August, 
1559,  it  was  amid  scenes  of  wild  disorder;  the  headquarters  of  the  Holy 
Office  at  Rome  were  stormed  and  wrecked;  the  Pope's  statue  was 
destroyed  and  dragged  with  ignominy  through  the  streets.  His 
ecclesiastical  policy  appeared  to  be  as  complete  a  failure  as  his  attack 
upon  the  power  of  Spain. 

But  indirectly  the  action  of  Paul  had  a  permanent  effect  on  the 
history  of  Europe.  It  led  to  the  rupture  of  the  Truce  of  Vaucelles.  The 
conclusion  of  this  truce  had  seemed  to  be  a  triumph  for  Montmorency ; 
but  Cardinal  Caraffa  and  the  influence  of  Guise  secured  the  real  tri- 
umph for  the  party  of  Lorraine.  Soon  after  the  expedition  of  Guise  to 
the  peninsula  war  broke  out  in  the  North  of  France,  but  both  sides  con- 
fined themselves  for  some  time  to  preparations  and  defensive  measures. 
On  June  7, 1557,  Mary  of  England  declared  war  on  France.  At  length, 
in  July  the  army  of  the  Netherlands  under  Emmanuel  Philibert  began 
to  move,  and  laid  siege  first  to  Guise  and  then  to  St  Quentin.  Coligny 
succeeded  in  throwing  himself  into  this  place,  and  animated  its  defence; 
but  when  Montmorency  attempted  to  relieve  the  fortress  (August  10)  he 
wasattacked  and  severely  defeated.  The  Constable  himself,  with  many  of 
the  greatest  men  of  France,  was  taken  prisoner.  The  only  French  army 
in  the  north  was  scattered,  and  the  way  lay  open  to  Paris.  But  Philip 
refused  to  allow  the  advance,  and  the  French  were  given  time  to  assemble 
troops  and  put  their  defences  in  order.  Coligny's  obstinate  defence  in 
St  Quentin  gave  seventeen  days  of  respite  after  the  battle;  and  Guise 
was  recalled  from  Italy.  Philip  occupied  a  few  trifling  fortresses  and 
then  disbanded  his  army. 

In  November  Guise,  whose  authority  with  the  King  was  now  no 


1558-9]  Treaty  of  Cateau-Camhresis  93 

longer  contested  by  the  conflicting  influence  of  Montmorency,  had 
brought  together  an  army  ;  and  on  January  1,  1558,  the  siege  of  Calais 
was  undertaken  ;  in  eight  days  the  town  surrendered,  and  the  English 
were  expelled.  Guines  was  captured  shortly  afterwards,  and  this  gate 
of  France  was  closed  for  ever  to  the  English.  But  the  French  need 
was  extreme.  While  the  siege  of  Calais  was  proceeding  the  notables  of 
France  assembled  in  Paris  at  the  King's  command,  and  Henry  demanded 
of  them  a  loan  of  3,000,000  crowns,  one-third  from  the  clergy,  two- 
thirds  from  the  towns.  The  news  of  the  capture  of  Calais  caused  the 
proposition  to  be  accepted  with  acclamation.  In  April  the  marriage  of 
the  Dauphin  to  Mary  of  Scotland,  with  the  secret  agreements  concluded 
previousl}',  opened  other  prospects  to  French  foreign  policy. 

In  May,  liowever,  negotiations  for  peace  were  begun  by  the  Cardinal 
of  Lorraine,  and  Antoine  de  Granvelle,  Bishop  of  Arras,  suggested  the 
alliance  of  France  and  Spain  for  the  suppression  of  heresy,  pointing 
out  that  persons  in  the  highest  positions  in  France,  such  as  Coligny, 
d'Andelot,and  the  Bourbon  family,  were  infected  by  the  new  doctrines. 
Religion  was  beginning  in  France  to  intensify  party  rivalries  and  serve 
as  an  excuse  for  partisan  revenge.  But  before  negotiation  could  lead  to 
its  full  result  war  had  once  more  to  play  its  part. 

The  French  plan  of  campaign  for  1558  was  directed  to  the  capture 
of  Thionville,  and,  as  a  sequel,  to  a  double  invasion  of  Flanders.  But 
the  delays  caused  by  the  long  resistance  of  Thionville,  which  did  not 
fall  until  June  22,  prevented  the  simultaneous  execution  of  the  two 
attacks.  The  Marechal  de  Termes  from  Calais  was  first  in  the  field, 
and  after  sacking  Dunkirk  and  ravaging  the  country  he  found  himself 
forced  by  the  Flemish  army  under  Egmont  to  give  battle  near  Grave- 
lines.  Here  he  suffered  a  complete  defeat  (July  13)  to  which  the  guns 
of  the  English  fleet  contributed.  After  this  the  French  armies  were 
compelled  to  confine  themselves  to  the  defensive. 

In  October  peace  negotiations  were  resumed  on  the  north-eastern 
frontier  in  the  county  of  Saint  Pol.  During  the  course  of  the  discus- 
sions Mary  Tudor  died  (November  17).  Her  death  facilitated  an  agree- 
ment in  two  ways.  In  the  first  place  it  reduced  the  importance  of 
the  question  of  Calais.  Philip  had  no  longer  any  need  to  insist  on  the 
restitution  of  this  town  for  the  benefit  of  Elizabeth.  In  the  second 
place  it  allowed  marriage  proposals  to  weigh  in  the  scales,  and,  although 
Philip  sued  for  the  hand  of  Elizabeth  of  England,  there  was  little  to  be 
expected  in  that  quarter.  After  the  conference  had  been  removed  to 
Cateau-Cambresis  (February,  1559),  Elizabeth,  finding  that  Spain  was 
not  supporting  her  demands  for  restitution,  agreed  that  France  should 
retain  Calais  for  eight  years,  and  the  way  was  cleared  for  the  main 
compact.  The  peace  was  signed  on  April  2.  The  last  point  decided 
was  that  Philip  should  marry  Elizabeth  of  France. 

France  restored  Marienburg,  Thionville,  Damvillers,  and  Montmedy, 


94  The  resulting  settlement  in  Europe  [1558 

receiving  iu  return  Saint  Quentin,  Ham,  le  Catelet,  and  Terouanne  ; 
Bouvines  and  Bouillon  were  given  back  to  the  Bishop  of  Liege  ;  Philip 
retained  Hesdin.  Montferrat,  the  Milanese,  Corsica,  Savoy,  Bresse,  and 
Piedmont  were  abandoned  by  the  French  ;  except  for  the  places  of 
Turin,  Pinerolo,  Chieri,  Chivasso,  and  Villanuova  in  the  territory  of 
Asti.  Montalcino  was  to  be  given  up  to  the  Duke  of  Tuscany.  France 
did  not  press  for  the  restitution  of  Navarre,  but  retained  Saluzzo. 

Thus  the  contest  of  sixty  years  reached  its  close,  never  to  revive 
in  the  same  form.  The  boundaries  of  the  Netherlands  were  restored 
with  slight  alterations.  Italy  was  left  as  Charles  had  fixed  her  system. 
Savoy  was  re-established  as  a  buifer-State  between  France  and  Italy  ;  a 
position  which  the  genius  of  her  Dukes  would  use  to  good  advantage. 
No  treaty  marks  a  more  definite  stage  in  the  development  of  the 
European  state  system.  It  involved  the  acceptance  of  Spanish  supremacy 
in  Italy,  and  the  recognition  of  the  organic  unity  of  France,  of  Spain, 
and  of  the  Netherlands.  For  all  her  concessions  France  received  com- 
pensation in  the  debateable  land  which  lies  between  the  southern 
boundaries  of  the  Netherlands  and  the  northern  slopes  of  the  Alps. 
Here  the  international  struggles  of  the  next  century  would  be  fought 
out,  until  French  ambition  returned  once  more  to  attempt  the  conquest 
of  the  Netherlands,  and  the  obliteration  of  the  Pyrenees.  The  death  of 
Henry  II,  and  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  in  England,  the  death  of 
Paul  IV,  the  marriage  of  Philip  with  Elizabeth  of  France,  and  the  death 
of  Charles  V,  all  occurring  within  twelve  months  contributed  to  em- 
phasise the  close  of  an  old  epoch,  the  beginning  of  a  new  one.  The 
policy  of  Montmorency  had  triumphed  over  that  of  the  Guises  ;  the 
obstinate  persistence  of  Charles  V  had  received  its  posthumous  reward  ; 
and  the  outbreak  of  the  wars  of  religion  in  France  on  the  one  hand,  the 
revolt  of  the  Netherlands  on  the  other,  were  before  long  to  paralyse  all 
those  remaining  forces  and  ambitions  which  might  have  reversed  the 
decisions  recorded  at  Cateau-Cambresis.  The  Reformation  had  hitherto 
run  its  course  almost  without  opposition  ;  henceforward  the  energies, 
which  had  been  absorbed  in  the  long  dynastic  struggle,  would  be  occu- 
pied by  the  still  greater  contests  arising  out  of  the  Counter-Reformation 
movement.  In  these  contests  the  resumption  of  the  Council  of  Trent, 
and  its  policy  and  conclusions,  furnished  the  dogmatic  basis,  and  defined 
the  controversial  issues. 

Throughout  this  period  there  have  been  two  main  plots  in  European 
history,  the  one  centring  in  Germany  and  concerned  with  the  questions  of 
religious  reform,  the  other  centring  in  Italy,  and  leading  to  the  permanent 
settlement  of  territorial  questions  in  Europe.  The  plots  are  interwoven, 
and  it  has  been  only  possible  in  the  foregoing  pages  occasionally  to 
indicate  important  points  of  contact.  But  each  can  be  to  some  extent 
isolated.     The    German   plot   is   reserved   for  fuU  treatment  in  later 


Royal  authority  in  the  French  Church  95 

chapters.  The  Italian  plot  has  for  its  chief  actors,  on  the  one  side 
Spain  and  the  Netherlands,  on  the  other  side  France,  while  Savoy  and 
the  lesser  States  of  Italy  each  contribute  their  share  to  the  action.  The 
internal  affairs  of  Italy  have  received  in  the  description  of  the  main  plot 
such  attention  as  space  permitted,  and  as  was  necessary  to  explain  the 
forces  at  work.  But  the  internal  affairs  of  France,  Spain,  and  the 
Netherlands  have  been  left  aside.  Yet  some  knowledge  of  these  is 
required  if  we  are  to  understand  the  power  exerted  by  each  in  the 
forcible  settlement  of  European  questions. 

The  course  of  the  reform  movement  in  France  is  related  below; 
the  institutions  of  France  are  described  in  the  first  volume  of  this 
History.  It  remains  only  to  give  some  account  of  those  internal  de- 
velopments and  changes  that  affected  the  activity  of  France  as  a 
European  power. 

In  the  institutions  of  France  there  is  little  change  to  record.  The 
absolute  monarchy  had  been  already  established,  and  was  further 
developed  by  the  school  of  legists,  who  had  their  headquarters  in  the 
University  of  Toulouse.  At  their  head  was  the  Chancellor  Duprat. 
Their  principles  and  their  action  aimed  at  the  continuous  extension  of 
the  roj'al  power.  From  the  King  thej'  received  their  employment  and 
their  reward ;  to  his  strength  they  owed  everything.  All  their  efforts 
were  directed  to  its  increase  both  in  State  and  in  Chiu'ch.  In  the 
Church  especially  the  Concordat  of  1516  proved  a  valuable  instrument 
in  their  hands.  The  absolute  authority  of  the  Crown  over  the  Church 
is  proved  by  the  lavish  grants  frequently  made  by  the  clergy  to  the 
King,  enforced  at  need  by  the  seizure  of  property  :  and  by  the  proposals 
to  sell  clerical  lands  for  the  King's  benefit  put  forward  in  1561  at  St 
Germain.  The  clergy  then  offered  willingly  16,600,000  livres  to  avoid 
this  danger,  so  real  did  it  appear.  The  old  Gallicanism  of  the  Pragmatic 
died  hard,  finding  its  last  strongholds  in  the  Parliaments  and  the  Uni- 
versities ;  and  was  not  finally  defeated  until  the  lit  de  justice  of  1527, 
which  removed  all  jurisdiction  relative  to  high  ecclesiastical  office  from 
the  ParlemenU  and  gave  it  to  the  Grand  Conseil.  The  old  Gallicanism 
was  replaced  by  a  new  royal  Gallicanism,  which  resented  interference 
with  the  ecclesiastical  affairs  of  France  from  beyond  the  Alps,  but  placed 
the  Church  at  the  mercy  of  the  King.  In  consequence  of  this  subjection 
of  the  French  Church  to  the  King  the  clergy  of  France  fell  into  two 
well-marked  divisions :  those  who  held  or  hoped  for  rich  ecclesiastical 
promotion  from  the  King,  and  the  poor  parochial  clergy,  who  thought 
and  suffered,  and  whose  importance  as  a  political  factor  will  be  seen  in 
the  Wars  of  Religion. 

Though  the  general  lines  remain  unaltered,  administrative  changes 
can  be  perceived.  The  elevation  of  Jacques  de  Beaune  de  Semblan9ay 
(1518)  to  the  cognisance  of  all  the  King's  finances,  extraordinary  as  well 
as  ordinary,  shows  the  desire  for  some  unification ;  but  his  fall  in  1527 


96  Revenue,  justice,  and  army  in  France 

proves  that  the  new  arrangements  were  not  supposed  to  have  worked  well. 
The  establishment  of  the  Tresor  de  Vepargne  in  1523  shows  the  same 
effort  for  centralisation ;  this  measure  weakened  the  Tresoriers  and 
G-eneraux,  and  brought  the  whole  question  of  finance  under  the  eyes  of 
the  King's  Council.  The  scope  of  the  Tresor  de  Vepargne  was  gradually 
widened,  and  in  1542  a  more  radical  reform  was  introduced ;  the  old 
financial  districts  were  abolished,  and  16  new  centres  were  established 
for  the  receipt  of  all  funds  arising  from  the  areas  assigned  to  them. 
These  reforms  were  in  the  right  direction,  but  did  not  go  far  enough. 

The  sources  of  revenue  were  unchanged.  The  taille  was  still  the 
mainstay  of  the  government,  and  was  increased  at  will.  In  1513  it 
reached  a  figure  higher  than  in  the  time  of  Louis  XI.  Extraordinary 
supplies  were  raised  by  the  sale  of  domain  lands,  and  by  the  creation  of 
new  offices,  intended  to  be  sold.  The  consequent  multiplication  of 
unnecessary  officials,  each  anxious  to  recoup  his  expenditure,  was  the 
gravest  abuse  of  the  time.  Under  Francis  I  the  system  of  aides  was 
gradually  extended  to  the  provinces  which  had  hitherto  enjoyed  im- 
munity ;  and,  in  spite  of  solemn  engagements,  the  quart  du  sel  of 
Guyenne  was  first  (1511)  raised  to  three-eighths ;  and  then  in  1515  the 
gahelle  du  sel,  with  its  system  of  compulsory  purchase,  was  put  in  full 
force  in  all  the  south-western  provinces.  The  revolt  of  La  Rochelle 
(1512)  and  of  Guyenne  in  general  (1548)  did  not  prevent  the  execution 
of  these  decrees. 

Similarly  in  the  department  of  justice  changes  are  rather  administra- 
tive than  constitutional.  The  introduction  of  the  presidiaux,  a  board  of 
judges  appointed  for  each  lailliage  or  senechaussee,  and  intermediate 
between  the  Parlements  and  the  Courts  of  first  instance,  was  probably 
advantageous  to  the  people,  though  its  immediate  object  was  the  raising 
of  money  by  the  sale  of  the  new  offices.  The  Edict  of  Villers-Cotterets 
(1539)  was  a  great  landmark  in  the  administration  of  justice  and  in  the 
history  of  legal  procedure  in  France  ;  it  instituted  the  use  of  the  French 
language  in  the  Courts,  and  superseded  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  in  the 
great  majority  of  cases  by  the  lay  tribunals.  The  clergy  in  1552  paid 
three  millions  of  crowns  to  recover  these  rights  of  jurisdiction ;  but 
apparently  the  King  did  not  fulfil  his  share  in  the  bargain. 

The  old  military  system  changed  slowly.  The  mounted  archers  were 
gradually  being  separated  from  the  gens  d'armes,  whose  following  they 
had  originally  constituted.  As  the  im23ortance  of  hand  firearms  increased 
the  number  of  archers  was  diminished ;  and  some  attempt  was  made  so 
to  strengthen  the  defensive  armour  of  horse  and  man  as  to  meet  this 
new  weapon  of  offence.  Ohevau-Iegers,  trained  after  the  Stradiot  fashion, 
and  other  varieties  of  cavalry  begin  to  appear.  But  in  infantry  France 
was  still  deficient.  The  attempt  of  Francis  I  (1543)  to  form  seven 
provincial  legions,  each  of  6000  foot,  alarmed  the  gentry  by  placing 
arms  in  the  hands  of  the  peasantry,  and  for  this  reason  or  because  of 


The  Constable  cle  Montmorency  97 

Francis'  habitual  inconsequence  it  was  abandoned,  and  only  served  as  a 
pretext  for  levying  the  additional  impost  for  which  this  measure  was 
made  an  excuse. 

Thus  the  chief  interest  of  the  time  for  France  consisted  in  the 
persons  who  conducted  the  government.  The  system  might  not  change, 
but  the  spirit  in  which  it  was  administered  depended  on  the  King  and 
the  persons  in  whom  he  had  trust.  Inattentive  as  he  was  to  business, 
the  character  of  Francis  I  had  a  marked  effect  upon  the  history  of  his 
reign.  The  profuse  expenditure  on  his  Court  must  have  reacted  on  his 
foreign  policy.  The  cost  of  the  Court  is  estimated  by  a  Venetian 
ambassador  as  amounting  to  1,500,000  crowns  a  year,  i.e.  about  three 
millions  of  livres  tournois.  Of  this  sum  600,000  crowns  went  in  pensions. 
The  King's  buildings,  important  as  they  are  in  the  history  of  art, 
weighed  heavily  upon  his  people.  The  influence  of  the  King's  mistresses, 
Madame  de  Chateaubriand  and  Madame  d'Etampes,  and  of  his  son's 
mistress,  Diane  de  Poitiers,  decided  the  fate  of  ministers  if  not  of  nations. 
In  the  early  years  of  the  King's  reign,  and  particularly  during  his  cap- 
tivity, the  influence  of  the  Queen-Mother,  Louise  of  Savoy,  was  pre- 
dominant. Her  powerful  will  and  vigorous  though  narrow  intellect 
were  not  without  their  value  for  France  ;  but  her  rapacity  was  unlimited, 
and  led  to  the  treason  of  the  Duke  of  Bourbon,  the  most  important 
domestic  incident  of  the  reign.  During  his  early  years  Francis  was 
dominated  by  Bonnivet,  and  to  a  less  degree  by  Lautrec  and  Lescun ; 
during  his  later  life  (1541-7)  Admiral  Annebaut  (de  Retz)  and  the  Car- 
dinal de  Tournon  came  to  the  front.  The  Due  d'Enghien  also  enjoyed 
so  much  favour  that  his  accidental  death  was  ascribed  by  Court  gossip  to 
the  act  of  the  Dauphin  himself.  In  the  King's  middle  life  Philippe  de 
Brion  had  considerable  power.  But  none  of  these  courtiers  can  be  said 
to  have  possessed  a  definite  scheme  of  policy  or  to  have  worked  for 
any  definite  end.  More  important  was  the  part  played  by  Anne  de 
Montmorency. 

So  early  as  1522  Montmorency  became  a  Marshal  of  France.  In  the 
negotiations  for  the  King's  freedom  after  Pavia  he  took  a  pi^ominent 
part,  and  was  shortly  afterwards  appointed  grand  maitre  (1526),  and 
from  that  time  until  1541  he  was  the  most  conspicuous  person  at  the 
King's  Court.  He  was  Governor  of  Languedoc,  a  post  previously  held 
by  the  Constable  de  Bourbon,  the  duties  of  which  he  executed  as  a  rule 
by  deputy.  The  tendencies  of  his  policy  were  favourable  to  the  Emperor. 
He  was  unwilling  to  break  the  peace,  to  form  alliances  with  the  Pro- 
testant Princes  or  with  the  Sultan.  Thus  the  period  of  his  influence 
shows  a  certain  touch  of  moderation.  Montmorency  was  not  always 
able  to  make  his  counsels  prevail ;  but  their  weight  was  always  on  the 
side  of  compromise.  In  the  conclusion  of  the  Treaty  of  Cambray  his 
influence  is  especially  to  be  seen.  On  the  other  hand  there  is  little 
reason  to  believe  that  the  grand  maitre  contributed  anything  masterly 

C.    M.    H.    II.  7 


98  The  Guises  and  Diane  de  Poitiers 

to  the  inconsequent  foreign  policy  of  Francis  ;  any  notable  ideas  of 
strategy  to  his  army.  His  intellect  was  mediocre,  and  his  most  brilliant 
achievement  was  the  devastation  of  Provence  in  1536,  which  frustrated 
the  invasion  of  Charles. 

In  1538  he  reached  the  culmination  of  his  fortunes  under  Francis, 
when  he  was  created  Constable  of  France.  Tlie  interview  at  Aigues- 
Mortes  belongs  to  this  period,  when  his  influence  was  perhaps  at  its 
height.  He  must  have  the  responsibility  of  the  policy  which  allowed 
Charles  a  free  hand  in  the  chastisement  of  Ghent  (1540).  The  failure 
of  this  policy  left  France  isolated,  unable  to  rely  either  upon  England 
or  upon  the  German  Protestants.  His  fall,  however,  in  1541  was  rather 
due  to  a  Court  intrigue,  to  the  fear  of  Francis  of  his  heir-apparent, 
to  the  jealousy  of  Madame  d'Etampes  and  of  Diane  de  Poitiers,  than  to 
the  actual  failure  of  his  schemes.  The  party  of  Madame  d'Etampes 
won  the  day,  and  the  Constable  retired  into  private  life. 

Francis  retained  so  much  animosity  against  him  that  he  is  said  to 
have  warned  his  son  before  his  death  not  to  admit  Montmorency  to 
his  favour.  But  the  advice,  if  given,  had  little  effect,  and  immediately 
on  his  accession  Henry  recalled  the  Constable  to  the  royal  Councils, 
and  even  paid  the  arrears  of  his  pensions  for  the  years  of  his  suspension. 
The  alliance  between  the  Constable  and  Diane  was  intimate,  but  she 
perceived  the  danger  of  having  him  all-powerful.  The  Princes  of  the 
House  of  Guise,  cadets  of  the  sovereign  House  of  Lorraine,  and  nearly 
related  to  the  Houses  of  Anjou  and  Bourbon,  were  the  instruments 
whom  she  found.  Their  father,  Claude,  Due  de  Guise,  a  contemporary 
of  Francis  I,  had  not  succeeded  in  pushing  his  own  fortunes  at  Court, 
but  had  nevertheless  found  opportunities  to  serve  the  King  by  levying 
troops  for  him  and  otherwise,  so  that  he  was  able  to  secure  dignities  for 
himself,  with  offices  and  benefices  for  his  relations.  His  brother,  Jean, 
Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  was  not  inconspicuous  at  the  Court  of  Francis  and 
in  the  history  of  the  French  Renaissance.  But  the  high  fortunes  of  the 
family  begin  with  the  sons  of  Claude  ;  among  whom  are  pre-eminent, 
Francis,  the  soldier,  afterwards  Due  de  Guise,  and  Charles,  Archbishop 
of  Reims,  and  afterwards  Cardinal.  Under  Henry  II  the  places  of  i:)ower 
and  profit,  the  spoils  of  discarded  favourites,  the  determination  of  the 
King's  policy,  are  divided  between  Montmorency  and  the  Guises  ;  while 
Diane  de  Poitiers  secured  through  their  rivalry  the  decisive  intermediate 
position.  The  Guise  policy  was  aggressive,  enterprising,  provocative. 
Montmorency  was  more  cautious,  and  favourable  to  peace.  To  the 
former  were  due  the  League  of  Rome  and  the  rupture  of  the  Truce  of 
Vaucelles  ;  to  the  latter  the  Truce  of  Vaucelles,  and  above  all,  the  Peace 
of  Cateau-Carabresis.  All  alike  were  zealous  Catholics  ;  all  alike  ra- 
pacious and  greedy.  In  view  of  the  powerful  elements  disputing  the 
supremacy  over  her  husband  Catharine  de'Medici  wisely  kept  in  the  back- 
ground.  Her  capacities  for  rule  and  intrigue  were  not  seen  until  a  later  age. 


The  government  of  Spain  99 

Montmorency  had  the  advantage  through  his  powerful  character, 
his  industry,  and  will ;  the  Guises  through  their  skill  in  winning 
the  people  and  the  interests  to  their  side ;  in  the  Church,  in  the 
army,  in  the  Parlement,  their  influence  was  great  and  was  carefully 
developed.  On  the  other  hand,  the  immense  ransoms  exacted  from 
Montmorency  in  1559  for  himself  and  his  relatives  impoverished  his 
estate,  and  the  Peace  of  Cateau-Cambresis  was  unpopular  and  diminished 
his  credit.  Thus,  after  the  death  of  Henry  II  the  advantage  lay  with 
the  younger  rivals  of  the  Constable. 

The  changes  in  the  system  of  the  Spanish  monarchy  during  the  period 
are  even  less  significant  than  those  in  France.  The  Cortes  of  Castile 
continued  to  meet  and  to  retain  their  hold  upon  finance.  The  servicio 
became  a  regular  impost,  voted  every  three  years.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  alcabala  was  a  ground  for  frequent  bargaining  between  the  King 
and  the  Cortes,  and  the  advantage  fell  to  the  latter ;  for  the  total  nett 
income  raised  from  this  source  did  not  increase  during  the  reign,  while 
the  purchasing  power  of  money  was  diminished  by  at  least  one  half. 
The  real  limitation  of  the  royal  power  in  Spain  is  seen  in  the  refusal 
of  all  three  Estates,  exceptionally  summoned  to  the  Cortes  of  1538,  to 
agree  to  Charles'  proposal  to  raise  money  by  a  new  excise  on  meat.  The 
power  of  the  Crown  over  the  Cortes,  if  it  was  increasing,  was  increasing 
slowly,  and  its  increase  was  due  to  the  extension  of  royal  authority  in 
the  towns,  where  the  royal  eorregidor  was  becoming  more  autocratic, 
and  the  regidores  themselves  were  appointed  by  the  Crown.  The  pressure 
of  the  hidalgos  for  admission  to  municipal  office,  which  is  a  notable 
feature  of  the  time,  would  tend  also  gradually  to  divorce  the  ruling 
class  in  the  towns  from  those  who  carried  on  its  business  and  felt  the 
real  pinch  of  tyranny  or  maladministration. 

In  Spain  more  than  elsewhere  the  interests  of  the  Church  and  the 
Crown  were  closely  linked.  The  Church  looked  to  royal  protection 
against  heresy  and  against  the  Cortes.  The  King  looked  to  the  Church 
for  supplies  in  time  of  need ;  he  had  its  good  government  thoroughly 
at  heart ;  he  supported  and  moderated  the  action  of  the  Inquisition  so 
far  as  he  could,  for  the  Inquisition,  though  based  on  royal  authority, 
was  not  entirely  under  his  control.  The  forcible  conversion  of  the 
Moriscos  of  Valencia  in  1525  and  following  years  attests  the  zeal, 
rather  than  the  wisdom,  of  Charles.  The  flight  of  a  large  part  of  this 
industrious  class,  and  the  discontent  and  apprehensions  of  those  who 
remained,  living  as  they  did  in  constant  fear  of  the  Holy  Office,  was  a 
main  cause  of  the  impoverishment  of  a  considerable  part  of  Spain.  Charles 
seems  himself  to  have  perceived  his  error,  and  the  severity  of  the  decrees 
against  the  Moriscos  was  considerably  relaxed  during  his  later  years. 

In  Spain  also  the  administrative  developments  are  more  conspicuous 
than  the  constitutional.  The  business  of  government  was  becoming 
more  and  more  complicated.     Under  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  we  have 


100  The  power  of  Sjxiin. — Lidustrij 

already  the  Councils  of  State,  of  Finance,  and  of  Castile,  besides  the 
Council  of  Aragon ;  and  in  addition  the  Councils  of  the  Inquisition,  of 
the  Military  Orders,  and  of  the  Cruzada.  Under  Charles  we  have  in 
addition  the  Chamber,  the  Council  of  War,  the  Council  of  the  Indies, 
the  Council  of  Flanders,  and  the  Council  of  Italy.  The  several  fields 
of  these  Councils,  with  a  monarch  who  was  absent  from  Spain  for  one- 
half  of  the  total  period  of  his  reign,  required  to  be  carefully  limited  and 
circumscribed.  This  led  in  its  turn  to  the  transaction  of  more  and  more 
business  by  writing,  and  that  to  red-tape  and  its  accompanying  delays ; 
so  that  the  excessive  elaboration  of  bureaucratic  methods  tended  to 
hamper  and  impede  the  despatch  of  business.  This  became  even  more 
conspicuous  in  the  time  of  Philip. 

The  problem  of  the  decline  of  S]Dain  has  often  occupied  the  minds  of 
historians,  who  are  at  a  loss  to  discover  why  the  country  which  fills  so 
large  a  place  on  the  European  canvas  during  the  sixteenth  century  after- 
wards fell  into  impotence  and  decay.  But  the  contrast  has  generally 
been  exaggerated.  Spain  was  never  very  rich  and  never  very  powerful. 
Individual  Spaniards  showed  great  enterprise  and  great  talents.  Fer- 
dinand, and  after  him  Charles  V,  obtained  from  their  country  all  the 
energy  of  which  it  was  capable.  The  Spanish  foot- soldier  had  admirable 
qualities.  But  the  work  of  Charles  V  depended  as  much  upon  the 
Netherlands  as  upon  Spain  ;  Italian  enterprise  was  supported  as  much 
from  the  Low  Countries  as  from  Spain;  and  from  both  together  support 
was  always  insuflicient,  and  had  to  be  eked  out  by  local  oppression.  No 
great  national  impulse  raised  the  Habsburgs  to  the  head  of  Europe ; 
the  conquest  of  the  Indies  was  due  more  to  good  fortune  and  the 
enterprise  of  a  few  men  than  to  the  greatness  of  the  Spanish  nation. 
When  Spain  lost  the  stimulus  of  great  rulers,  when  she  was  deprived  of 
the  efficient  support  of  the  Netherland  commercial  wealth,  when  she  was 
thrown  upon  her  own  resources,  then  the  true  weakness  of  the  national 
character  disclosed  itself.  The  Spaniards  could  never  be  a  great  nation 
because  they  were  never  industrious. 

Nevertheless,  if  Spain  ever  had  an  age  of  industry,  it  was  in  the  time 
of  Charles  V.  From  the  time  of  the  conquest  of  ^Mexico  an  immense 
opening  was  offered  to  Spanish  trade.  Charles  was  anxious  to  encourage 
this  trade.  In  1529  he  opened  the  export  trade  to  a  number  of  cities  of 
the  East  and  the  North,  and  broke  down  to  some  extent  the  monopoly 
of  Seville.  As  a  consequence  many  industries  increased  by  leaps  and 
bounds.  The  silk  industry  in  Toledo  and  Seville,  the  cloth  industry  in 
Toledo,  Cordova,  Cuenca  and  Segovia,  reached  considerable  dimensions. 
The  same  stimulus  reacted  upon  agriculture  and  the  wool-growing 
industry.  For  a  time  the  new  discoveries  seemed  to  have  opened  an 
industrial  era  in  Spain.  But  before  long  the  influx  of  precious  metals, 
rapid  after  the  conquest  of  Mexico,  more  rapid  after  the  conquest  of 
Peru,  and  immense  after  the  discovery  of  the  silver  mines  of  Potosi, 


Internal  economy.  —  The  Indies  101 

began  to  raise  the  prices  of  commodities  in  Spain,  far  above  the  level 
current  in  other  countries.  This  made  Spain  a  bad  seller  and  a 
profitable  market.  In  spite  of  all  the  laws  against  export  of  treasure 
the  merchants  managed  to  exchange  their  wares  of  foreign  manufacture 
for  Spanish  bullion,  and  to  transport  it  beyond  the  border.  The  trade 
with  the  Spanish  colonies  stimulated  competition.  The  legislation  of 
1552  encouraged  import  and  discouraged  export  in  the  interests  of  the 
inhabitants  of  Spain.  The  industries  that  had  flourished  began  once 
more  to  shrink;  the  influx  of  treasure,  with  the  appearance  of  wealth 
which  it  brought  to  so  many,  discouraged  exertion,  always  distasteful  to 
the  Spaniards,  and  by  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Charles  V  the  period  of 
industrial  activity  was  already  in  its  decline.  This  was  not  due  to  the 
severity  of  taxation  —  having  regard  to  the  rise  of  prices  the  taxes  of 
Spain  probably  became  lighter  during  the  period  —  but  to  the  natural 
action  of  the  circumstances  upon  the  national  temperament,  aided  by 
bad  laws  and  a  misconceived  economic  policy.  But  the  worst  results 
of  these  forces  and  methods  fall  outside  our  period. 

The  returns  from  the  colonies  enriched  the  government  and  individuals 
rather  than  the  nation.  The  fifth  share  of  the  treasury  in  all  treasure 
imported  and  other  profits  from  colonial  trade  brought  the  revenue 
from  this  source  in  1551  to  400,000  and  in  1556  to  700,000  ducats. 
The  whole  treasure  of  the  Indian  fleet  was  seized  for  the  first  time  in 
1535  by  way  of  loan;  and  the  evil  precedent  was  followed  in  later  years, 
until  forbidden  by  a  law  of  Philip  in  1567. 

In  the  government  of  the  Indies  Charles  took  a  lively  interest,  and 
his  belief  in  their  future  was  not  to  be  shaken.  His  relations  with  his 
great  adventurers  were  not  always  happy.  Cortes  ended  his  days  in  a 
maze  of  litigation.  Fernando  Pizarro  was  imprisoned  in  1539  for  a  long 
period.  Francisco  was  killed  by  the  insurgents,  against  whom  the  home 
government  gave  him  insufficient  support.  Gonzalo  Pizarro  was  executed 
for  rebellion  in  1548.  But  the  difficulties  of  controlling  these  autocratic 
soldiers  at  a  distance  of  4000  miles  accounts  for  many  misunderstandings; 
and  the  natural  tendency  to  local  despotism  and  virtual  independence 
required  constant  supervision  and  suggested  suspicion.  In  regard  to  the 
treatment  of  the  natives  and  the  question  of  the  encomiendas  Charles' 
policy  was  humane  ;  though  his  measures  were  only  in  part  successful. 
He  lent  a  ready  ear  to  the  representations  of  Las  Casas,  and  supported 
the  missionaries  against  the  colonists.  On  the  whole  his  colonial  policy 
achieved  its  objects ;  the  natives  were  preserved  from  extermination 
or  universal  slavery ;  while  the  provinces  of  Mexico,  Peru,  Bolivia, 
Northern  Chili,  with  Venezuela, -New  Granada,  and  Central  America, 
were  in  his  reign  reduced  to  order  and  tolerable  government.  The 
spice  trade  with  the  Moluccas  he  endeavoured  at  one  time  to  secure  for 
the  Spaniards  ;  but  in  1529  he  was  content  to  leave  the  monopoly  to 
the  Portuguese  in  return  for  an  ample  money  compensation. 


102  Burgundy  and  the  Netherlands 

The  provinces  of  the  Netherlands  inherited  by  Charles  were  sub- 
stantially increased  before  his  death.  The  French  enclave  of  Tournay 
was  conquered  in  1521.  After  a  long  period  of  civil  war  Friesland  was 
finally  annexed  in  1523.  The  expulsion  of  the  Bishop  of  Utrecht  by 
the  Duke  of  Gelders  was  the  excuse  for  the  acquisition  of  the  temporal 
sovereignty  of  this  important  diocese  by  Charles  in  1527  ;  and  the  city 
of  Utrecht  was  reconquered  in  1528.  The  endless  struggle  with  the 
Duke  of  Gelders  did  not  end  with  the  death  of  Charles  of  Egmont  in 
1538 ;  but  the  rapid  campaign  of  Charles  against  the  Duke  of  Cleves 
resulted  in  the  final  incorporation  of  Gelders  with  the  Burgundian 
possessions  in  1543.  Groningen  and  the  neighbouring  territory  had 
been  acquired  in  1536.  In  1543  Charles  forced  also  Cambray  to 
accept  a  garrison.  Liege,  though  still  in  nominal  independence,  was 
brought  more  and  more  under  Burgundian  influence.  Its  Bishop, 
Evrard  de  la  Marck,  maintained  with  Charles  almost  unbroken  friendship 
until  his  death  in  1538.  Then  Charles  ]3rocured  the  election  of  his 
uncle  George,  the  bastard  son  of  Maximilian.  Charles  used  the  territory 
of  Liege  as  his  own,  building  on  it  the  fortress  of  Marienburg  (1546), 
and  after  the  capture  of  this  town  Charlemont  and  Philippe ville  in  1554. 

Thus  the  area  of  Burgundian  supremacy  was  widened  and  its 
boundaries  rectified  ;  and  in  1548  the  status  of  the  Provinces  with 
reference  to  the  Empire  was  revised.  The  whole  of  them  was  included 
in  the  Burgundian  Circle  ;  they  were  declared  not  to  be  subject  to  the 
laws  of  the  Empire  ;  they  were  bound  however  to  contribute  to  imperial 
subsidies,  and  received  in  return  the  protection  of  the  Empire.  The 
effect  of  this  measure  was  to  sever  the  connexion  between  the  Empire 
and  the  Netherlands  ;  for  the  protection  was  a  figment,  and  the  con- 
tribution remained  unpaid.  The  suzerainty  of  France  over  Flanders  and 
Artois  had  been  renounced  in  1529,  and  thus  the  Burgundian  possessions 
became  a  single  and  independent  whole.  The  Pragmatic  Sanction  of 
1548  further  declared  that  the  law  of  succession  for  all  the  Provinces 
should  be  henceforth  the  same,  and  prevented  the  danger  of  a  divided 
inheritance. 

The  regency  of  Margaret  of  Savoy,  which  ended  in  1530,  and  that 
of  Maria  of  Hungary,  which  terminated  in  1552,  were  both  directed  by 
the  supreme  will  of  Charles,  though  much  discretion  was  left  to  these 
able  and  faithful  vicegerents.  The  centralisation  of  the  government 
was  carried  further.  Councils  of  State  and  of  Finance  for  the  whole 
aggregate  were  established.  A  central  Court  of  Appeal  was  set  up  at 
Malines,  though  its  authority  was  not  universally  accepted.  The  States- 
General  for  all  the  principalities  were  frequently  summoned ;  and, 
although  their  decisions  were  not  legally  binding  on  the  several  States, 
every  effort  was  made  to  enforce  the  will  of  the  majority  upon  every 
district.  Here  as  elsewhere  Charles  respected  the  constitution  and  did 
not  attempt  to  enforce  his  will  against  the  vote  of  the  States.     Many 


Heresy  in  the  Netherlands  103 

instances  are  on  record  in  which  he  was  obliged  to  give  way.  The  newly 
acquired  provinces  were  not  immediately  incorporated  in  the  assembly 
of  States-General. 

In  the  Netherlands,  as  in  his  other  dominions,  Charles  endeavoured 
to  enforce  his  will  upon  the  Church.  But  the  rival  interests  of  the 
great  alien  sees,  possessing  ecclesiastical  authority  over  the  chief  part  of 
his  territory,  rendered  this  difficult  ;  and  his  plan  for  the  creation  of  six 
national  dioceses  failed  owing  to  the  ojDposition  of  the  existing  prelates 
and  the  Roman  See.  But  in  the  matter  of  heresy  he  succeeded  in 
holding  his  own  for  his  lifetime.  Early  in  1521  before  the  Diet  of 
Worms  he  issued  his  first  edict  in  the  Netherlands  against  Luther.  By 
repeated  laws,  increasing  in  stringency,  he  kept  if  not  the  Reformed 
opinions  at  any  rate  their  public  expression  within  bounds ;  and  the 
onl}"  serious  danger  of  an  outbreak  in  the  Netherlands  under  Charles  was 
at  the  time  of  the  i\.nabaptist  movement  at  Miinster  (1535),  when  the 
attempted  seizure  of  Amsterdam  by  those  sectaries  led  to  a  more  rigorous 
persecution  of  them  in  various  parts  of  the  Netherlands.  The  Inquisition 
was  established  on  a  secular  basis,  for  Charles  could  not  afford  to  give 
this  powerful  instrument  into  the  hands  of  alien  Bishops  or  the  Holy 
See.  But  under  the  surface  the  forces  were  growing;  the  movement  was 
amorphous  and  heterogeneous  ;  Lutheranism  in  the  North,  Zwinglian 
views  in  the  South,  Anabaptist  doctrine  among  the  more  violent,  and 
towards  the  end  of  the  reign  the  more  methodical  and  better  organised 
Calvinistic  system  were  spreading  in  spite  of  the  Inquisition.  The 
persecution  of  Charles,  which,  although  vigorous  in  appearance,  was 
in  effect  not  especially  severe,  succeeded  in  concealing  rather  than  in 
X^reventing  the  spread  of  heresy.     This  legacy  he  left  to  his  son. 

Indeed,  though  the  Netherlands  flourished  under  Charles,  though 
their  trade  prospered  through  the  connexion  with  Spain  and  the  Indies, 
though  the  wealth  of  Antwerp  and  Amsterdam  increased  year  by  year, 
though  peace  was  preserved  and  apparent  obedience,  though  territory 
Avas  rounded  off  and  hostile  province  incorporated,  the  seeds  were  being 
sown  which  bore  fruit  in  the  days  of  Philip.  The  pressure  of  taxation 
was  severe.  The  Spanish  garrisons  introduced  in  the  early  years  of 
Charles'  reign  were  hated  here  as  elsewhere.  Religious  causes  of  discord 
were  constantly  growing.  Charles  spent  but  a  small  part  of  his  reign 
in  the  Netherlands,  but  his  early  years  were  passed  there,  and  he  was 
never  a  stranger,  nor  out  of  sympathy.  His  son  was  a  Spaniard,  and  his 
home  in  Spain.  The  days  of  Margaret  and  Maria  were  to  be  followed 
by  the  rule  of  a  different  class  of  proconsuls,  with  a  different  kind  of 
instructions.  Then  the  accumulated  discontent,  the  weariness  of  long- 
continued  burdens  borne  in  a  cause  that  was  not  their  own,  the  strain 
of  the  prolonged  strife  with  France,  their  natural  friend,  all  the  errors 
and  mistaken  policy  of  Charles,  would  make  themselves  felt ;  the  issue  of 
these  things  will  be  seen  in  a  later  volume. 


CHAPTER  IV 

LUTHER 

The  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  had  its  birth  and  growth 
in  a  union  of  spiritual  and  secular  forces  such  as  the  world  has  seldom 
seen  at  any  other  period  of  its  history.  On  the  secular  side,  the  times 
were  full  of  new  movements,  intellectual  and  moral,  politiccil,  social,  and 
economic;  and  spiritual  forces  were  everywhere  at  work,  which  aimed 
at  making  religion  the  birthright  and  possession  of  the  common  man  — 
whether  king,  noble,  burgher,  artisan,  or  peasant  —  as  well  as  of  the 
ecclesiastic,  a  possession  which  should  directly  promote  a  worthy  life 
within  the  family  and  the  State.  These  religious  impulses  had  all  a 
peculiar  democratic  element  and  were  able  to  impregnate  with  passion 
and,  for  a  time,  to  fuse  together  the  secular  forces  of  the  period.  Hence 
their  importance  historically.  If  the  main  defect  in  the  earlier  histories 
of  the  Reformation  has  been  to  neglect  the  secular  sides  of  the  movement, 
it  is  possible  that  more  recent  historians  have  been  too  apt  to  ignore  the 
religious  element  which  was  a  real  power. 

It  may  be  an  exaggeration  to  say,  as  is  sometimes  done,  that  this 
religious  side  of  the  Reformation  began  in  the  inward  religious  growth 
jof  a  single  personality  —  the  river  comes  from  a  thousand  nameless  rills 
and  not  only  from  one  selected  fountain-head  ;  yet  Luther  was  so 
prominent  a  figure  that  the  impulses  in  his  religious  life  may  be  taken  as 
the  type  of  forces  which  were  at  work  over  a  wide  area,  and  the  history 
of  these  forces  may  be  fitly  described  in  tracing  the  genesis  and  growth 
of  his  religious  opinions  from  his  early  years  to  his  struggle  against 
Indulgences. 

The  real  roots  of  the  religious  life  of  Luther  must  be  sought  for  in 
the  family  and  in  the  popular  religious  life  of  the  times.  What  had 
Luther  and  Myconius  and  hundreds  of  other  boys  of  the  peasant  and 
burgher  classes  been  taught  by  their  parents  within  the  family,  and 
what  religious  influences  met  them  in  the  high-school  and  University  ? 
Fortunately  the  writings  of  the  leaders  of  new  religious  movement 
abound  in  biographical  details;  and  the  recent  labours  of  German 
historians  enable  us  to  form  some  idea  of  the  discordant  elements  in 
tlie  religious  life  at  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century. 


Popular  religious  life  in  Germans/  105 

The  religion  taught  by  parents  to  children  in  pious  German  families 
seems  to  have  been  simple,  unaffected  and  evangelical.  Myconius  relates 
how  his  father,  a  burgher,  was  accustomed  to  expound  the  Apostles' 
Creed  to  the  boy  and  to  tell  him  that  Jesus  Christ  was  the  Saviour  from 
all  sins  ;  that  the  one  thing  needed  to  obtain  God's  pardon  for  sins  was 
to  pray  and  to  trust;  and  how  he  insisted  above  all  that  the  forgiveness 
of  God  was  a  free  gift,  bestowed  without  fee  by  God  on  man  for  the 
sake  of  what  Christ  had  done.  Little  books  suitable  for  family  instruc- 
tion were  in  circulation  in  which  were  printed  the  Creed,  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  sometimes  one  or  two  Psalms  in 
the  German  tongue.  Simple  catechisms  and  other  small  books  of 
devotion  seem  to  have  been  in  circulation  which  were  full  of  very  simple 
evangelical  teaching.  It  is  probable  that  Luther  repeated  a  great  deal 
of  what  was  commonly  taught  to  children  in  his  own  earliest  years,  when, 
in  later  days,  he  himself  wrote  little  books  for  the  young.  Traces  of 
this  simple  family  piety,  which  insisted  that  all  holiness  came  from 
"  trusting  in  the  holy  passion  of  Christ,"  and  that  nothing  which  the 
sinner  could  do  for  himself  availed  anything,  may  be  found  all  down 
the  stream  of  medieval  religious  life  in  the  most  popular  hymns  and 
in  the  sermons  of  the  great  revival  preachers. 

The  latter  half  of  the  fifteenth  century  saw  the  growth  of  a  form  of 
piety  very  different  from  that  simple  household  religion.  A  strange 
terror  seemed  to  brood  over  the  people.  The  plague  came  periodically 
into  the  crowded  and  badly  drained  towns ;  new  diseases  made  their 
appearance  and  added  to  the  prevailing  fear  ;  the  dread  of  a  Turkish 
invasion  seemed  to  be  prevalent  —  mothers  scared  their  children  by 
naming  the  Turks,  and  in  hundreds  of  German  parishes  the  bells  tolled 
in  the  village  steeples  calling  the  people  to  pray  to  God  to  deliver  them 
from  Turkish  raids.  This  prevailing  fear  bred  a  strange  restlessness. 
Crowds  of  pilgrims  thronged  the  highwaj's,  trudging  from  shrine  to 
shrine,  hoping  to  get  deliverance  from  fear  and  assurance  of  pardon  for 
sins.  Princes  who  could  afford  a  sufficiently  large  armed  guard  visited 
the  holy  places  in  Palestine  and  brought  back  relics  which  they  stored  in 
their  private  chapels ;  the  lesser  nobility  and  the  richer  burghers  made 
pilgrimages  to  Rome,  especially  during  the  Jubilee  years,  which  became 
somewhat  frequent  in  the  later  Middle  Ages,  and  secured  indulgences  by 
visiting  and  praying  before  the  several  shrines  in  the  Holy  City.  For 
the  common  folk  of  Germany,  in  the  last  decades  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
the  favourite  place  of  pilgrimage  was  Compostella  in  Spain,  and,  in  the 
second  degree,  Einsiedeln  in  Switzerland.  It  was  said  that  the  bones  of 
St  James  the  Brother  of  our  Lord  had  been  brought  from  Palestine  to 
Compostella;  and  the  shrine  numbered  its  pilgrims  by  the  hundred 
thousand  a  year.  So  famous  and  frequent  was  this  place  of  pilgrimage 
that  a  special,  one  might  almost  say  a  professional,  class  of  pilgrims  came 
into  existence,  the  Jacobshriider,  who  were   continually  on  the  roads 


106  Religious  revival 


coming  to  or  from  Compostella,  seeking  to  win  pardon  for  themselves 
or  others  by  their  wandering  devotion. 

Sometimes  the  desire  to  go  on  pilgrimage  became  almost  an  epidemic. 
Bands  of  children  thronged  the  roads,  bareheaded  and  clad  in  nothing 
but  their  shirts  ;  women  left  their  families  and  men  deserted  their  work. 
In  vain  preachers  of  morals  like  Geiler  von  Kaisersberg  denounced  the 
practice  and  said  that  on  pilgrimages  more  sinners  were  created  than 
sins  pardoned.  The  terror  swayed  men  and  they  fled  to  shrines  where 
they  believed  they  could  find  forgiveness ;  the  pilgrimage  songs  make  a 
small  literature  ;  and  pilgrim  guide-books,  like  the  Mirabilia  Romae  and 
Die  Waif  art  und  Strassizu  Sant  Jacob,  appeared  in  many  languages. 

This  revival  of  religion  had  its  special  effect  on  men  destined  to  a 
relio-ious  life.  The  secular  clergy  seem  to  have  been  the  least  affected. 
Chronicles,  whether  of  towns  or  of  families,  bear  witness  to  the  degrada- 
tion of  morals  among  the  parish  priests  and  the  superior  clergy.  The 
Benedictines  and  their  dependent  Orders  of  monks  do  not  appear  to 
have  shared  largely  in  the  religious  movement.  It  was  different  however 
with  the  Dominicans,  the  Franciscans,  and  the  mendicant  Augustinians. 
These  begging  friars  reformed  themselves  strenuously,  in  the  medieval 
sense  of  reformation.  They  went  back  to  their  old  lives  of  mortifying 
the  flesh,  of  devoting  themselves  to  works  of  practical  benevolence  and 
of  self-denying  activity.  As  a  consequence,  they,  and  not  the  parish 
clergy,  had  become  the  trusted  religious  leaders  of  the  people.  Their 
chapels  were  thronged  by  the  common  folk,  and  the  better  disposed 
nobles  and  burghers  took  them  for  their  confessors  and  spiritual  directors. 
It  was  in  vain  that  the  Roman  Curia  proclaimed,  by  its  Legates  in 
Germany,  the  old  doctrine  that  the  benefits  of  religious  acts  do  not  de- 
pend upon  the  personal  character  of  the  administrators;  that  it  published 
regulations  binding  all  parishioners  to  confess  at  least  once  a  year  to 
their  parish  priests.  The  people,  high  and  low,  felt  that  Bishops  who 
rode  to  the  Diet  accompanied  by  their  concubines  disguised  in  men's 
clothing,  and  parish  priests  who  were  tavern-keepers  or  the  most 
frequent  customers  at  the  village  public-house,  were  not  true  spiritual 
guides.  They  turned  for  the  consolations  of  religion  to  the  poor- living, 
hard-working  Franciscans  and  Augustinian  Eremites  who  listened  to 
their  confessions  and  spoke  comfortingly  to  their  souls,  who  taught  the 
children  and  said  masses  without  taking  fees.  The  last  decades  of  the 
fifteenth  century  were  the  time  of  a  revival  in  the  spiritual  power  and 
devotion  of  the  mendicant  Orders. 

One  result  of  the  underlying  fear  which  inspired  this  religious 
revival  was  tlie  way  in  which  the  personality  of  Christ  was  constantly 
regarded  in  the  common  Christian  thought  of  the  time  as  it  is  revealed 
to  us  in  autobiographies,  in  sermons,  and  in  pictorial  representations. 
The  Saviour  was  concealed  behind  the  Judge,  who  was  to  come  to 
punish  the  wicked.     Luther  tells  us  that  when  he  was  a  boy  in  the 


Cults  of  the  Virgin  and  St  Anne  107 

parish  church  his  childish  imagination  was  inflamed  by  the  stained-glass 
picture  of  Jesus,  not  the  Saviour,  but  the  Judge,  of  a  fierce  countenance, 
seated  on  a  rainbow,  and  carrying  a  flaming  sword  in  His  hand.  This 
idea  prevented  pious  people  who  held  it  from  approaching  Jesus  as  an 
intercessor.  He  Himself  needed  to  be  interceded  with  on  behalf  of  the 
poor  sinners  He  was  coming  to  judge.  And  this  thought  in  turn  gave 
to  the  adoration  of  the  Virgin  Mother  a  strength  and  intensity  hitherto 
unknown  in  medieval  religion.  The  doctrine  of  the  Immaculate  Con- 
ception had  strenuous  advocates  ;  men  and  women  formed  themselves 
into  confraternities  that  they  might  beseech  her  intercession  with  the 
strength  that  numbers  give  ;  and  these  confraternities  spread  all  over 
Germany.  The  intercessory  powers  of  the  Virgin  Mother  became  a 
more  and  more  important  element  in  the  popular  religion,  and  little 
books  of  devotion  were  in  circulation  —  the  Little  Grospel,  the  Pearl  of 
the  Passion  —  which  related  with  many  a  comment  the  words  of  Christ 
on  the  Cross  to  St  John  and  to  the  Virgin.  Then  the  idea  grew  up 
that  the  Virgin  herself  had  to  be  interceded  with  in  order  to  become  an 
intercessor  ;  and  her  mother,  St  Anne,  became  the  object  of  a  cult  which 
may  almost  be  called  new.  This  "  Cult  of  the  Blessed  Anna  "  rapidly 
extended  itself  in  ever-widening  circles  until  there  were  few  districts  in 
Germany  which  had  not  their  confraternities  devoted  to  her  service. 
Such  was  the  prevailing  enthusiastic  popular  religion  of  the  last  decades 
of  the  fifteenth  century  —  the  religion  which  met  and  surrounded  a 
sensitive  boy  when  he  left  his  quiet  home  and  entered  the  world.  It 
had  small  connexion,  save  in  the  one  point  of  the  increased  reverence 
paid  to  the  Virgin,  with  the  theology  of  the  Schools,  but  it  was  the 
religious  force  among  the  people. 

Side  by  side  with  this  flamboyant  popular  religion  can  be  discerned 
another  spiritual  movement  so  unlike  it,  so  utterly  divergent  from  it  in 
character  and  in  aim,  that  it  is  surprising  to  detect  its  presence  within 
the  same  areas  and  at  the  same  period,  and  that  we  need  scarcely  wonder 
that  it  has  been  so  largely  overlooked.  Its  great  characteristic  was  that 
laymen  began  to  take  into  their  own  hands  matters  which  had  hitherto 
been  supposed  to  be  the  exclusive  property  of  churchmen.  We  can 
discern  the  impulse  setting  in  motion  at  the  same  time  princes, 
burghers,  and  artisans,  each  class  in  its  own  way. 

The  Great  Council  of  Constance  had  pledged  the  Church  to  a  large 
number  of  practical  reforms,  aiming  at  the  reinvigoration  of  the  various 
local  ecclesiastical  institutions.  These  pledges  had  never  been  fulfilled, 
and  their  non-fulfilment  accounts  for  one  side  of  the  German  opposition 
to  Rome.  During  the  last  decades  of  the  fifteenth  century  some  of  the* 
German  Princes  assumed  the  right  to  see  that  within  their  lands  proper 
discipline  was  exercised  over  the  clergy  as  well  as  over  the  laity.  To 
give  instances  would  need  more  space  than  this  chapter  affords.  It  is 
enough  to  say  that  the  jus  episcopate  which  Luther  claimed   in  later 


108  Secular  control  of  religion  and  charity 


days  for  the  civil  power  had  been  exercised,  and  that  for  the  good  of 
the  people,  in  the  lands  of  Brandenburg  and  of  Saxony  before  the  close 
of  the  fifteenth  century.  We  have  therefore  this  new  thing,  that  the 
laity  in  power  had  begun  to  set  quietly  aside  the  immunities  and  privi- 
leges of  the  Church,  to  this  extent  at  least,  that  the  civil  authorities 
compelled  the  local  ecclesiastical  institutions  within  their  dominions  to 
live  under  the  rule  of  reform  laid  down  by  an  ecumenical  council,  and 
tliat  tliey  did  this  despite  the  remonstrances  of  the  superior  ecclesiastical 
authorities. 

The  same  assertion  of  the  rights  of  laymen  to  do  Christian  work  in 
their  own  way  appears  when  the  records  of  the  boroughs  are  examined. 
The  whole  charitable  system  of  the  Middle  Ages  had  been  administered 
by  the  Church  ;  all  bequests  for  the  relief  of  the  poor  had  been  placed 
in  the  hands  of  the  clergy  ;  and  all  donations  for  the  relief  of  the  poor 
were  given  to  clerical  managers.  The  burghers  saw  the  charitable  be- 
quests of  their  forefathers  grossly  perverted  from  their  original  purposes, 
and  it  began  to  dawn  upon  them  that,  although  the  law  of  charity  was 
part  of  the  law  of  Christ,  it  did  not  necessarily  follow  that  all  charities 
must  be  under  ecclesiastical  administration.  Hence  cases  appear,  and 
that  more  frequently  as  the  years  pass,  where  burghers  leave  their 
charitable  bequests  to  be  managed  by  the  town  council  or  other  secular 
authority  ;  and  this  particular  portion  of  Christian  work  ceased  to  be 
the  exclusive  possession  of  the  clergy. 

Another  feature  of  the  times  was  the  growth  of  an  immense  number 
of  novel  religious  associations  or  confraternities.  They  were  not,  like 
the  praying  circles  of  the  Mystics  or  of  the  Gottesfreunde,  strictly  non- 
clerical  or  anti-clerical  ;  they  had  no  objection  to  the  protection  of  the 
Church,  but  they  had  a  distinctively  lay  character.  Some  of  them  were 
associations  of  artisans  ;  and  these  were  commonly  called  Kalands^  be- 
cause it  was  one  of  their  rules  to  meet  once  a  month  for  divine  service, 
usuall}^  in  a  chapel  belonging  to  one  of  the  mendicant  Orders.  Others 
bore  curious  names,  such  as  St  Urmia  s  Schifflein,  and  enforced  a  rule  that 
all  the  members  must  pray  a  certain  number  of  times  a  week.  Pious 
people  frequently  belonged  to  a  number  of  these  associations.  The  mem- 
bers united  for  religious  purposes,  generally  under  the  auspices  of  the 
Church  ;  but  they  were  confraternities  of  laymen  and  women  who  had 
marked  out  for  themselves  their  own  course  of  religious  duties  quite 
independently  of  the  Church  and  of  its  traditional  ideals.  Perhaps  no 
greater  contribution  could  be  made  to  our  knowledge  of  the  quiet  reli- 
gious life  at  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century  than  to  gather  together  in 
a  monograph  what  can  be  known  about  these  religious  confraternities. 

Such  was  the  religious  atmosphere  into  which  Luther  was  born  and 
which  he  breathed  from  his  earliest  days.  His  mother  taught  him  the 
simple  evangelical  hynnis  which  had  fed  her  own  spiritual  growth  ;  his 
father    had    that    sturdy   common-sense    piety   which   belonged    to    so 


1483-1501]  Luther's  early  life  109 

many  of  the  better  disposed  nobles,  burghers,  and  artisans  of  the  time ; 
while  the  fear  of  Jesus  the  Judge,  who  was  coming  to  judge  and  pun- 
ish the  wicked,  branded  itself  on  his  child's  soul  when  he  gazed  up  at 
the  vengeful  picture  of  our  Lord.  He  was  taught  at  home  the  Ten 
Commandments,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  words  of  Jesus  from  the  Gospels, 
the  Creed,  such  simple  hymns  as  Christ  ist  erstanden,  Bin  kindelein 
so  lobelich,  and  Nun  bitten  wir  den  heiligen  Geist  —  all  that  went  to 
make  what  he  long  afterwards  called  "  the  faith  of  the  children."  His 
father's  strong  dislike  to  monks  and  friars  ;  the  Hussite  propaganda, 
which,  in  spite  of  all  attempts  at  repression,  had  penetrated  the  Harz 
and  Thuringia  ;  the  Mansfeld  police  regulations,  with  other  evidence 
from  the  local  chronicles,  show  how  much  the  lay  religion  had  made  its 
way  among  the  people.  The  popular  revival  displayed  itself  in  the 
great  processions  and  pilgrimages  made  to  holy  places  in  his  neighbour- 
hood —  to  Kyffhiiuser,  where  there  was  a  miraculous  wooden  cross,  to  the 
Bruno  Chapel  of  Quernfurt,  to  the  old  chapel  at  Welfesholz,  and  to  the 
cloister  church  at  Wimmelberg. 

Martin  Luther  was  born  on  November  10,  1483,  at  Eisleben,  and 
spent  his  childhood  in  Mansfeld.  His  father,  Hans,  was  a  miner  in  the 
Mansfeld  district,  where  the  policy  of  the  counts  of  Mansfeld,  to  build 
and  let  out  on  hire  small  smelting  furnaces,  enabled  thrifty  and  skilled 
workmen  to  rise  in  the  world. 

The  boy  grew  up  amidst  the  toilsome,  grimy,  often  coarse  surroundings 
of  the  German  peasant  life  —  protected  from  much  that  was  evil  by  the 
wise  severity  of  his  parents,  but  sharing  in  its  hardness,  its  superstitions, 
and  its  simple  political  and  ecclesiastical  ideas  ;  as  that  the  Emperor 
was  God's  ruler  on  the  earth  who  would  protect  poor  people  from  the 
Turk  ;  that  the  Church  was  the  "  Pope's  house,"  in  which  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  was  the  house-father ;  and  that  obedience  and  reverence  were  due 
to  the  lords  of  the  soil.  He  went  to  the  village  school  in  Mansfeld  and 
endured  the  cruelties  of  a  merciless  pedagogue  ;  he  was  sent  later  to  a 
school  at  Magdeburg,  and  then  to  St  George's  High  School  at  Eisenach. 
In  these  boyish  days  he  was  a  "poor  student,"  i.e.  one  who  got  his 
education  and  lodging  free,  was  obliged  to  sing  in  the  church  choir, 
and  was  permitted  to  sing  in  tlie  streets,  begging  for  bread.  His 
later  writings  abound  in  references  to  these  early  school-days  and  to 
his  own  quiet  thoughts  ;  and  they  make  it  plain  that  the  religion  of 
fear  was  laying  hold  on  him  and  driving  out  the  earlier  simple  family 
faith.  Two  pictures  branded  themselves  on  his  childish  mind  at  Mag- 
deburg. He  saw  a  young  Prince  of  Anhalt,  who  had  forsaken  rank  and 
inheritance  and,  to  save  his  soul,  had  become  a  barefooted  friar,  carrying 
the  huge  begging-sack,  and  worn  to  skin  and  bone  by  his  scourgings  and 
fastings  and  prayers.  The  other  was  an  altar-piece  in  a  church,  the 
picture  of  a  ship  in  which  was  no  layman,  not  even  a  King  or  a  Prince  ; 
in  it  were  the  Pope  with  his  Cardinals  and  Bishops,  and  the  Holy  Ghost 


110  Life  at  Eisenach  [1483-1501 


hovered  over  them  directing  their  course,  while  priests  and  monks 
managed  the  oars  and  the  sails,  and  thus  they  went  sailing  heavenwards. 
The  laymen  were  swimming  in  the  water  beside  the  ship  ;  some  were 
drowning,  others  were  holding  on  by  ropes  which  the  monks  and  priests 
cast  out  to  them  to  aid  them.  No  layman  was  in  the  ship  and  no 
ecclesiastic  was  in  the  water.  The  picture  haunted  him  for  years.  At 
Eisenach  he  had  some  glimpses  of  the  old  simple  family  life,  this  time 
accompanied  by  a  new  refinement,  in  the  house  of  the  lady  whom  most 
biographers  identify  with  Frau  Cotta.  But  the  religious  atmosphere 
of  the  town  which  the  boy  inhaled  and  enjoyed  was  new.  The  town 
was  under  the  spell  of  St  Elizabeth,  the  pious  Landgravine  who  had 
given  up  family  life,  children,  and  all  earthly  comforts,  to  earn  a 
medieval  saintship.  Her  good  deeds  were  blazoned  on  the  windows  of 
the  church  in  which  Luther  sang  as  choir-boy,  and  he  had  long  conver- 
sations with  some  of  the  monks  who  belonged  to  her  foundations.  The 
novel  surroundings  tended  to  lead  him  far  from  the  homely  piety  of  his 
parents  and  from  the  more  cultured  family  religion  of  his  new  friends,  and 
he  confesses  that  it  was  with  incredulous  surprise  that  he  heard  Frau 
Cotta  say  that  there  was  nothing  on  earth  more  lovely  than  the  love 
of  husband  and  wife  when  it  is  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord.  He  had 
surrendered  himself  to  that  revival  of  crude  medieval  religion  which 
was  based  on  fear,  and  which  found  an  outlet  in  fastings,  scourgings, 
pilgrimages,  saint-worship,  and  in  general  in  the  thought  that  salvation 
demanded  the  abandonment  of  family,  friends,  and  the  activities  and 
enjoyments  of  life  in  the  world. 

After  three  happy  years  at  Eisenach  Luther  was  sent  to  Erfurt  and 
entered  his  name  on  the  matriculation  roll  in  letters  which  can  still  be 
read,  Martinus  Ludher  ex  ^Nlansfeldt.  Hans  Luther  had  been  prospering ; 
he  was  able  to  pay  for  his  son's  college  expenses  ;  Luther  was  no  longer 
a  "poor  student,"  but  was  able  to  give  undivided  attention  to  his 
studies.  The  father  meant  the  son  to  become  a  trained  lawyer  ;  and  the 
lad  of  seventeen  seems  to  have  accepted  without  question  the  career 
marked  out  for  him. 

The  University  of  Erfurt  was  in  Luther's  days  the  most  famous  in 
Germany.  It  had  been  founded  in  1392  by  the  burghers,  and  academic 
and  burgher  life  mingled  there  as  nowhere  else.  The  graduation  days 
were  town  holidays,  and  tlie  graduation  ceremonies  always  included 
a  procession  of  the  University  authorities,  the  gilds  and  the  town 
olhcials,  with  all  the  attendant  medieval  pomp,  and  concluded  with 
a  torchlight  marcli  at  night.  But  if  the  University  was  strictly  allied 
to  tlie  town  it  was  as  strongly  united  to  the  Church.  It  had  been 
enriched  with  numerous  papal  privileges  ;  its  chancellor  was  the  Arch- 
bisliop  of  Mainz  ;  many  of  its  theological  professors  held  ecclesiastical 
prebends,  and  others  were  monks  of  different  Orders  and  notably  of  the 
Augustinian  Eremites.     The  whole  teaching  staff  went  solemnly  to  hear 


1460-1501]  Humanists  of  Erfurt  111 

mass  at  the  beginning  of  every  term  ;  each  faculty  was  under  the 
protection  of  a  patron  Saint  —  St  George  presiding  over  the  faculty  of 
Philosophy  ;  the  professors  had  to  swear  to  teach  nothing  opposed  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church ;  and  care  was  taken  to  prevent  the 
beginnings  and  spread  of  heretical  opinions. 

The  University  teaching  was  medieval  in  all  essentials,  but  represented 
the  new,  as  Cologne  championed  the  old,  scholasticism.  Gabriel  Biel, 
the  disciple  of  William  of  Occam,  had  been  one  of  the  teachers. 
Humanism  of  the  German  type,  which  was  very  different  from  the 
Italian,  had  found  an  entrance  as  early  as  1460  in  the  persons  of 
Peter  Luder  and  Jacob  Publicius,  and  in  the  following  years  there  was 
a  good  deal  of  intercourse  between  Erfurt  scholars  and  Italian  humanists. 
Maternus  Pistoris  was  lecturing  on  the  Latin  classics  in  1491  and  had 
for  his  colleague  Nicholas  Marschalk,  who  was  the  first  to  establish  a 
printing-press  in  Germany  for  Greek  books.  They  had  speedily  gathered 
round  them  a  band  of  enthusiastic  scholars,  Johannes  Jager  of  Drontheim 
(Crotus  Rubeanus),  Henry  and  Peter  Eberach,  George  Burkhardt  of 
Spelt  (Spalatinus),  John  Lange,  and  others  known  afterwards  in  the  earlier 
stages  of  the  Reformation  movement.  Conrad  Mutti  (Mutianus  Rufus), 
who  had  studied  in  Italy,  was  one  of  the  leaders  ;  Eoban  of  Hesse 
(Helius  Eobanus  Hessus),  perhaps  the  most  gifted  of  them  all^  joined 
the  circle  in  1494.  These  humanists  did  not  attack  openly  the 
older  course  of  study  at  Erfurt.  They  wrote  complimentary  Latin 
poems  in  praise  of  their  older  colleagues  ;  they  formed  a  select  circle 
who  were  called  the  "  Poets  "  ;  they  affected  to  correspond  with  each 
other  after  the  manner  of  the  ancients.  In  private,  Mutianus  and  Crotus 
seem  to  have  delighted  to  reveal  their  eclectic  theosophy  to  a  band  of 
half- terrified,  half -admiring  youths  ;  to  say  that  there  was  but  one 
God,  who  had  the  various  names  of  Jupiter,  Mars,  Hercules,  Jesus,  and 
one  Goddess,  who  was  called  Juno,  Diana,  or  Mary  as  the  worshippers 
chose  ;  but  these  things  were  not  supposed  to  be  for  the  public  ear. 

The  University  of  Erfurt  in  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century 
was  the  recognised  meeting-place  of  the  two  opposing  tendencies  of 
scholasticism  and  humanism  ;  and  it  was  also,  perhaps  in  a  higher 
degree  than  any  other  university,  a  place  where  the  student  was  exposed 
to  many  other  diverse  influences.  The  system  of  biblical  exegesis 
first  stimulated  by  Nicholas  de  Lyra,  which  cannot  be  classed  under 
scholasticism  or  humanism,  had  found  a  succession  of  able  teachers  in 
Erfurt.  The  strong  anti-clerical  teaching  of  Jacob  of  Juterbogk  and  of 
John  Wessel,  who  had  taught  in  Erfurt  for  fifteen  years,  had  left  its 
mark  on  the  University  and  was  not  forgotten.  Low  mutterings  of  the 
Hussite  propaganda  itself,  Luther  tells  us,  could  be  heard  from  time  to 
time,  urging  a  strange  Christian  socialism  which  was  at  the  same  time 
thoroughly  anti-clerical.  Then  over  against  all  this  opportunities  were 
occasionally   given,    at   the    visits    of   papal   Legates,    for   seeing   the 


112  Luther's  studies  at  Erfurt  [i50i-5 

niagniticence  and  might  of  the  Roman  Church  and  of  the  Pope  its  head. 
In  1502  and  again  in  1504,  during  Luther's  student  days,  Cardinal 
Raimund,  sent  to  proclaim  in  Germany  new  and  unheard-of  Indulgences, 
visited  the  university  town.  The  civic  dignitaries,  the  Rector  Magnificus 
with  the  whole  University,  all  the  clergy,  the  monks  and  the  school 
children,  accompanied  by  crowds  of  the  townsfolk,  went  out  in  procession 
to  meet  him  and  escort  him  with  due  ceremony  into  the  city.  Add  to 
this  the  gross  dissipation  existing  among  many  of  the  student  sets,  and 
the  whisperings  of  foul  living  on  the  part  of  many  of  the  higher  clergy 
in  the  town,  and  some  idea  can  be  formed  of  the  sea  of  trouble,  doubt, 
questioning,  and  anxiety  into  which  a  bright,  sensitive,  imaginative,  and 
piously  disposed  lad  of  seventeen  was  thrown  when  he  had  begun  his 
student  life  in  Erfurt. 

Wlien  we  piece  together  references  in  correspondence  to  Luther's 
student  life,  recollections  of  his  fellow-students,  and  scattered  sayings 
of  his  own  in  after-life,  we  get  upon  the  whole  the  idea  of  a  very  level- 
headed youth,  with  a  strong  sense  of  the  practical  side  of  his  studies, 
thoroughly  respected  by  his  professors,  refusing  to  be  carried  away  into 
any  excess  of  humanist  enthusiasm  on  the  one  hand  or  of  physical 
dissipation  on  the  other ;  intent  only  to  profit  by  the  educational 
advantages  within  his  reach  and  to  justify  the  sacrifices  which  his 
father  was  making  on  his  behalf.  He  had  been  sent  to  Erfurt  to 
become  a  jurist,  and  the  faculty  of  Philosophy  afforded  the  preparation 
for  the  faculty  of  Law  as  well  as  of  Theology.  Luther  accordingly 
began  the  course  of  study  prescribed  in  the  faculty  of  Philosophy  — 
Logic,  Dialectic,  and  Rhetoric,  followed  by  Physics  and  Astronomy,  the 
teaching  in  all  cases  consisting  of  abstract  classification  and  distinctions 
without  any  real  study  of  life  or  of  fact.  The  teacher  he  most  esteemed 
was  John  Trutvetter,  the  famed  "  Erfurt  Doctor "  whose  fame  and 
genius,  as  all  good  Germans  thought,  had  made  Erfurt  as  well  known  as 
Paris.  Scholasticism,  he  said,  left  him  little  time  for  poetry  and  classical 
studies.  He  does  not  seem  to  have  attended  any  of  the  humanist  lec- 
tures. But  he  read  privately  a  large  number  of  the  Latin  classical 
authors.  Virgil,  whose  pages  he  opened  with  some  dread,  —  for  was  he 
not  in  medieval  popular  legend  a  combination  of  M'izard  and  prophet  of 
Christ  ? — became  his  favourite  author.  His  peasant  upbringing  made  him 
take  great  delight  in  the  Bucolics  and  G-eorgics  —  books,  he  said,  that 
only  a  herd  and  a  countryman  can  rightly  understand.  Cicero  charmed 
him  ;  he  delighted  in  his  public  labours  for  his  country  and  in  his  versa- 
tility, and  believed  him  to  be  a  much  better  philosopher  than  Aristotle. 
He  read  Livy,  Terence,  and  Plautus.  He  prized  the  pathetic  portions  of 
Horace  but  esteemed  him  inferior  to  Prudentius.  He  seems  also  to  have 
i-cad  from  a  volume  of  selections  portions  of  Propertius,  Persius,  Lucretius, 
Tibullus,  Silvius  Italicus,  Statins,  and  Claudian.  We  hear  of  him 
studying  Greek  privately  with  John  Lange.    But  he  was  never  a  member 


1502-5]  Luther  takes  religious  vows  113 

of  the  humanist  circle,  and  in  his  student  days  was  personally  un- 
acquainted with  its  leading  members.  He  had  none  of  the  humanist 
enthusiasm  for  the  language  and  the  spirit  of  the  past;  what  he  cared 
for  was  the  knowledge  of  human  life  which  classical  authors  gave  him. 
Besides,  the  "  epicurean  "  life  and  ideas  of  the  young  humanist  circle 
displeased  him.  They,  on  their  part,  would  evidently  have  received  him 
gladly.  They  called  him  "the  philosopher,"  they  spoke  about  his  gifts 
of  singing  and  lute-playing,  and  of  his  frank,  engaging  character.  In 
later  days  he  could  make  use  of  humanism;  but  he  never  was  a  humanist 
in  spirit  or  in  aim.  He  was  too  much  in  earnest  about  religious  matters, 
and  of  too  practical  a  turn  of  mind. 

Luther's  course  of  study  flowed  on  regularly.  He  was  a  bright, 
sociable,  hard-working  student  and  took  his  various  degrees  in  an 
exceptionally  short  time.  He  was  Bachelor  in  1502,  and  master  in  1505, 
when  he  stood  second  among  the  seventeen  successful  candidates.  He 
had  attained  what  he  had  once  thought  the  summit  of  earthly  felicity 
and  found  himself  marching  in  a  procession  of  University  magnates  and 
civic  dignitaries,  clothed  in  his  new  robes.  His  father,  proud  of  his  son's 
success,  sent  him  the  costly  present  of  a  Corpus  Juris.  He  may  have 
begun  to  attend  lectures  in  the  faculty  of  Law,  when  he  suddenly 
retired  into  a  convent  and  became  a  monk. 

This  action  was  so  unexpected  that  his  student  friends  made  all 
sorts  of  conjectures  about  his  reasons,  and  these  have  been  woven 
into  stories  which  are  pure  legends.  Little  or  nothing  is  known  about 
Luther's  religious  convictions  during  his  stay  at  Erfurt.  This  is  the 
more  surprising  since  Luther  was  the  least  reticent  of  men.  His 
correspondence,  his  sermons,  his  commentaries,  all  his  books  are  full  of 
little  autobiographical  details.  He  tells  what  he  felt  when  a  child,  what 
his  religious  thoughts  were  during  his  school-days;  but  he  is  silent  about 
his  thoughts  and  feelings  during  his  years  at  Erfurt,  and  especially 
during  the  months  which  preceded  his  plunge  into  the  convent.  He 
has  himself  made  two  statements  about  his  resolve  to  become  a  monk, 
and  they  comprise  the  only  accurate  information  obtainable.  He  says 
that  the  resolve  was  sudden,  and  that  he  left  the  world  and  entered  the 
cloister  because  "he  doubted  of  himself";  that  in  his  case  the  proverb 
was  true,  "  doubt  makes  a  monk." 

What  was  the  doubting  ?  The  modern  mind  is  tempted  to  imagine 
intellectual  difficulties,  to  think  of  the  rents  in  the  Church's  theology 
which  the  criticisms  of  Occam  and  of  Biel  had  produced,  of  the  complete 
antagonism  between  the  whole  ecclesiastical  mode  of  thinking  and  the 
enlightenment  from  ancient  culture  that  humanism  was  producing,  and 
Luther's  doubtings  are  frequently  set  down  to  the  self-questioning  which 
his  contact  with  humanism  in  Erfurt  had  produced.  But  this  idea,  if 
not  foreign  to  the  age,  was  strange  to  Luther.  He  doubted  whether  he 
could  ever  do  what  he  thought  had  to  be  done  by  him  to  save  his  soul 


114  The  Augustinian  Eremites  [i505 

if  he  remained  in  the  world.  That  was  what  compelled  him  to  enter  the 
convent.  The  lurid  fires  of  Hell  and  the  pale  shades  of  purgatory 
which  are  the  constant  background  of  Dante's  Paradise  were  always 
present  to  the  mind  of  Luther  from  boyhood.  Could  he  escape  the 
one  and  win  the  other  if  he  remained  in  the  world  ?  He  doubted  it  and 
entered  tlie  convent. 

The  Order  of  monks  which  Luther  selected  was  the  Augustinian 
Eremites.  Their  history  was  somewhat  curious.  Originally  they  had 
been  formed  out  of  the  numerous  hermits  who  lived  solitary  religious 
lives  throughout  Italy  and  Germany.  Several  Popes  had  desired  to 
bring  them  together  into  convents;  and  this  was  at  last  effected  by 
Alexander  IV,  who  had  enjoined  them  to  frame  their  constitution 
according  to  the  Rule  of  St.  Augustine.  No  other  order  of  monks 
shared  so  largely  in  the  religious  revival  of  the  fifteenth  century.  The 
convents  which  had  reformed  associated  themselves  together  into  what 
was  called  the  Congregation.  The  reformed  Augustinian  Eremites  strictly 
observed  their  vows  of  poverty  and  obedience;  they  led  self-denying 
lives;  they  represented  the  best  type  of  later  medieval  piety.  Their 
convents  were  for  the  most  part  in  the  larger  towns  of  Germany, 
and  the  monks  were  generally  held  in  high  esteem  by  the  citizens  who 
took  them  for  confessors  and  spiritual  directors.  The  Brethren  were 
encouraged  to  study,  and  this  was  done  so  successfully  that  professor- 
ships in  theology  and  in  philosophy  in  most  of  the  Universities  of 
Germany  in  the  fifteenth  century  were  filled  by  Augustinian  Eremites. 
They  also  cultivated  the  art  of  preaching;  most  of  the  larger  convents 
had  a  special  preacher  attached;  and  the  townspeople  flocked  to  hear 
him. 

Their  theology  had  little  to  do  with  Augustine;  nor  does  Luther 
appear  to  have  studied  Augustine  until  he  had  removed  to  Wittenberg. 
Their  views  belonged  to  the  opposite  pole  of  medieval  thought  and 
closely  resembled  those  of  the  Franciscans.  No  Order  paid  more  rever- 
ence to  the  Blessed  Virgin.  Her  image  stood  in  the  Chapter-house  of 
every  convent;  their  theologians  were  strenuous  defenders  of  the  Im- 
maculate Conception;  they  aided  to  spread  the  "cult  of  the  Blessed 
Anna. "  They  were  strong  advocates  of  papal  supremacy.  In  the  person 
of  John  von  Palz,  the  professor  of  theology  in  the  Erfurt  convent  and 
the  teacher  of  Lutlier  himself,  they  furnished  the  most  outspoken 
defender  of  papal  Indulgences.  This  was  the  Order  into  which  Luther 
80  suddenly  threw  himself  in  1505. 

He  spent  the  usual  year  as  a  novice,  then  took  the  vows,  and  was 
set  to  study  tlieology.  His  text-books  were  the  writings  of  Occam, 
Biel,  and  D'Ailly.  His  aptness  for  study,  his  vigour  and  precision  in 
debate,  his  acumen,  excited  the  admiration  of  his  teachers.  But  Luther 
had  not  come  to  tlie  convent  to  study  theology;  he  had  entered  to  save 
his  soul.     These  studies  were  but  pastime;  his  serious  and  dominating 


1505-8]  Influence  of  Staupitz  115 

task  was  to  win  the  sense  of  pardon  of  sin  and  to  see  his  body  a  temple 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  fasted  and  prayed  and  scourged  himself 
according  to  rule,  and  invented  additional  methods  of  maceration.  He 
edified  his  brethren  ;  they  spoke  of  him  as  a  model  of  monastic  piety  ; 
but  the  young  man  —  he  was  only  twenty-three  —  felt  no  relief  and  was 
no  nearer  God.  He  was  still  tormented  by  the  sense  of  sin  which  urged 
him  to  repeated  confession.  God  was  always  the  implacable  judge 
inexorably  threatening  punishment  for  the  guilt  of  breaking  a  law  which 
it  seemed  impossible  to  keep.  For  it  was  the  righteousness  of  God  that 
terrified  him  ;  the  thought  that  all  his  actions  were  tested  by  the  standard 
of  that  righteousness  of  God.  His  superiors  could  not  understand  him. 
Staupitz,  Vicar-General  of  the  Order,  saw  him  on  one  of  his  visitations 
and  was  attracted  by  him.  He  saw  his  sincerity,  his  deep  trouble,  his 
hopeless  despair.  He  advised  him  to  study  the  Bible,  St  Augustine, 
and  Tauler.  An  old  monk  helped  him  for  a  short  time  b}^  explaining 
that  the  Creed  taught  the  forgiveness  of  sin  as  a  promise  of  God,  and 
that  what  the  sinner  had  to  do  was  to  trust  in  the  promise.  But  the 
thought  would  come  :  Pardon  follows  contrition  and  confession  ;  how 
can  I  know  that  my  contrition  has  gone  deep  enough  ;  how  can  I  be 
sure  that  my  confession  has  been  complete  ?  At  last  Staupitz  began 
to  see  where  the  difficulty  lay,  and  made  suggestions  which  helped  him. 
The  true  mission  of  the  medieval  Church  had  been  to  be  a  stern  preacher 
of  righteousness.  It  taught,  and  elevated  its  rude  converts,  by  placing 
before  them  ideals  of  saintly  piety  and  of  ineffable  purity,  and  by 
teaching  them  that  sin  was  sin  in  spite  of  extenuating  circumstances. 
Luther  was  a  true  son  of  that  medieval  Church.  Her  message  had  sunk 
deeply  into  his  soul  ;  it  had  been  enforced  by  his  experience  of  the 
popular  revival  of  the  decades  which  had  preceded  and  followed  his 
birth.  He  felt  more  deeply  than  most  the  point  where  it  failed.  It 
contrasted  the  Divine  righteousness  and  man's  sin  and  weakness.  It 
insisted  on  the  inexorable  demands  of  the  law  of  God  and  at  the  same 
time  pronounced  despairingly  that  man  could  never  fulfil  them.  Staupitz 
showed  Luther  that  the  antinomy  had  been  created  by  setting  over 
against  each  other  the  righteousness  of  God  and  the  sin  and  helplessness 
of  man,  and  by  keeping  these  two  thoughts  in  opposition  ;  then  he 
explained  that  the  righteousness  of  God,  according  to  God's  promise, 
might  become  the  possession  of  man  in  and  through  Christ.  Fellowship 
of  man  with  God  solved  the  antinomy  ;  all  fellowship  is  founded  on 
personal  trust  ;  and  faith  gives  man  that  fellowship  with  God  through 
which  all  things  that  belong  to  God  can  become  his.  These  thoughts, 
acted  upon,  helped  Luther  gradually  to  win  his  way  to  peace  of  heart. 
Penitence  and  confession,  which  had  been  the  occasions  of  despair  when 
extorted  by  fear,  became  natural  and  spontaneous  when  suggested  by  a 
sense  of  the  greatness  and  intimacy  of  the  redeeming  love  of  God  in 
Christ. 


116  Religious  views.      Ordination  [i505-8 

The  intensity  and  sincerity  of  this  protracted  struggle  marked  Luther 
for  life.  It  gave  him  a  strength  of  character  and  a  living  power  which 
never  left  him.  The  end  of  the  long  inner  fight  had  freed  him  from  the 
burden  which  had  oppressed  him,  and  his  natm-ally  frank,  joyous  nature 
found  a  free  outlet.  It  gave  him  a  sense  of  freedom,  and  the  feeling 
that  life  was  something  given  by  God  to  be  enjoyed,  —  the  same  feeling 
that  humanism,  from  its  lower  level,  had  given  to  so  many  of  its  dis- 
ciples. For  the  moment  however  nothing  seemed  questionable.  He 
was  a  faithful  son  of  the  Medieval  Church,  "  the  Pope's  house,"  with 
its  Cardinals  and  its  Bishops,  its  priests,  monks,  and  nuns,  its  masses 
and  its  relics,  its  Indulgences  and  its  pilgrimages.  All  these  external 
things  remained  unchanged.  The  one  thing  that  was  changed  was  the 
relation  in  which  one  human  soul  stood  to  God.  He  was  still  a  monk 
who  believed  in  his  vocation.  The  very  fact  that  his  conversion  had 
come  to  him  within  the  convent  made  him  the  more  sure  that  he  had 
done  right  to  take  the  monastic  vow. 

Soon  after  he  had  attained  inward  peace  Luther  was  ordained, 
and  Hans  Luther  came  from  Mansfeld  for  the  ceremony,  not  that  he 
took  any  pleasure  in  it,  but  because  he  did  not  wish  to  shame  his  eldest 
son.  The  sturdy  peasant  adhered  to  his  anti-clerical  Christianity,  and 
when  his  son  told  him  that  he  had  a  clear  call  from  God  to  the  monastic 
life,  the  father  suggested  that  it  might  have  been  a  prompting  from  the 
devil.  Once  ordained,  it  was  Luther's  duty  to  say  mass  and  to  hear 
confessions,  impose  penance  and  pronounce  absolution.  He  had  no 
difficulties  about  the  doctrines  and  usages  of  the  Church  ;  but  he  put  his 
own  meaning  into  the  duties  and  position  of  a  confessor.  His  own 
experience  had  taught  him  that  man  could  never  forgive  sin  ;  that 
belonged  to  God  alone.  But  the  human  confessor  could  be  the  spiritual 
guide  of  those  who  came  to  confess  to  him  ;  he  could  warn  them  against 
false  grounds  of  confidence,  and  show  them  the  pardoning  grace  of  God. 

Luther's  theological  studies  were  continued.  He  devoted  himself  to 
Augustine,  to  Bernard,  to  men  who  might  be  called  "  experimental " 
theologians.  He  began  to  show  himself  a  good  man  of  business,  with 
an  eye  for  the  heart  of  things.  Staupitz  and  his  chiefs  entrusted  him 
with  some  delicate  commissions  on  behalf  of  the  Order,  and  made  quiet 
preparation  for  his  advancement.  In  1508  he,  with  a  few  other  brother 
monks,  was  transferred  from  the  convent  at  Erfurt  to  that  at  Wittenberg, 
to  assist  the  small  University  there. 

Some  years  before  this  the  Elector  Frederick  the  Wise  of  Saxony, 
the  head  of  the  Ernestine  branch  of  his  House,  had  resolved  to  provide 
a  university  for  his  own  dominions.  He  had  been  much  drawn  to  the 
Augustinian  Eremites  since  his  first  acquaintance  with  them  at  Grimma 
when  he  was  a  boy  at  school.  Naturally  Staupitz  became  his  chief 
adviser  in  his  new  scheme  ;  indeed  the  University  from  the  first  might 
almost    be   called    an    educational    establishment    belonging    to    the 


1508]  The  Unwersity  of  Wittenberg  117 

Augustinian  Eremites.  There  was  not  much  money  to  spare  at  the 
Electoral  Court.  A  sum  got  from  the  sale  of  Indulgences  some  years 
before,  which  Frederick  had  not  allowed  to  leave  the  country,  served 
to  make  a  beginning.  Prebends  attached  to  the  Castle  Church  —  the 
Church  of  All  Saints  was  its  ecclesiastical  name  —  furnished  the  salaries 
of  some  of  the  professors  ;  the  other  teachers  were  to  be  supplied  from 
the  monks  of  the  convent  of  the  Augustinian  Eremites  in  the  town. 
The  Emperor  Maximilian  granted  the  usual  imperial  privileges,  and  the 
University  was  opened  October  18,  1502.  Staupitz  himself  was  one  of 
the  professors  and  dean  of  the  faculty  of  Theology  ;  another  Augustinian 
Eremite  was  dean  of  the  faculty  of  Arts.  The  patron  Saints  of  the 
Order,  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  St  Augustine,  were  the  patron  Saints  of 
the  University.  Some  distinguished  teachers,  outside  the  Augustinian 
Eremites,  were  induced  to  come,  among  others  Jerome  Schurf  from 
Tiibingen  ;  Staupitz  collected  promising  young  monks  from  convents  of 
his  Order  and  enrolled  them  as  students  ;  other  youths  were  attracted 
by  the  teachers  and  came  from  various  parts  of  Germany.  The  Uni- 
versity enrolled  416  students  during  its  first  year.  This  success,  how- 
ever, appears  to  have  been  artificial ;  the  numbers  gradually  declined  to 
56  in  the  summer  session  of  1505.  The  first  teachers  left  it  for  more 
promising  places.  Still  Staupitz  encouraged  Frederick  to  persevere. 
New  teachers  were  secured  —  among  them  Nicholas  Amsdorf,  who  had 
then  a  great  reputation  as  a  teacher  of  the  old-fashioned  scholasticism, 
and  Andrew  Bodenstein  of  Carlstadt.  The  University  began  to  grow 
slowly, 

Luther  was  sent  to  Wittenberg  in  1508.  He  was  made  to  teach 
the  Dialectic  and  Physics  of  Aristotle,  a  task  which  he  disliked,  but 
whether  in  the  University  or  to  the  young  monks  in  the  convent  it  is 
impossible  to  say.  He  also  began  to  preach.  His  work  was  interrupted 
by  a  command  to  go  to  Rome  on  the  business  of  his  Order.  The 
Augustinian  Eremites,  as  has  been  already  said,  were  divided  into  the 
unref ormed  and  the  reformed  convents  —  the  latter  being  united  in  an 
association  which  was  called  the  Congregation.  Staupitz  was  anxious 
to  heal  this  schism  and  to  bring  all  the  convents  in  Germany  within  the 
reformation.  Difficulties  arose,  and  the  interests  of  peace  demanded 
that  both  the  General  of  the  Order  and  the  Curia  should  be  informed 
on  all  the  circumstances.  A  messenger  was  needed,  one  whom  he  could 
trust  and  who  would  also  be  trusted  by  the  stricter  party  among  his 
monks.  No  one  seemed  more  suitable  than  the  young  monk  Martin 
Luther. 

Luther  saw  Rome,  and  the  impressions  made  upon  him  by  his  visit 
remained  with  him  all  his  life.  He  and  his  companion  approached  the 
imperial  city  with  the  liveliest  expectations  ;  but  they  were  the  longings 
of  the  pious  pilgrim,  not  those  of  the  scholar  of  the  Renaissance  —  so 
little  impression  had  humanism  made  upon  him.     When  he  first  caught 


118  Luther  at  Rome  [i5i2-5 

sight  of  the  city  Luther  raised  his  hands  in  an  ecstasy,  exclaiming, 
"I  greet  thee,  thou  Holy  Rome,  thrice  holy  from  the  blood  of  the 
Martyrs."  That  was  his  mood  of  mind  —  so  little  had  his  convent 
struggles  and  the  peace  he  had  found  in  the  thought  that  the  just  live 
by  faith  separated  him  from  the  religious  ideas  of  his  time. 

His  olificial  business  did  not  cost  much  time  ;  he  seems  to  have  had 
no  complaints  to  make  against  the  Curia  ;  indeed  the  business  on  which 
he  had  been  sent  seems  to  have  been  settled  in  Germany  by  an  amicable 
compromise.  His  official  work  done,  he  set  himself  to  see  the  Holy 
City  with  the  devotion  of  a  pilgrim  and  the  thoroughness  of  a  German. 
He  visited  all  the  shrines,  especially  those  to  which  Indulgences  were 
attached.  He  climbed  the  thirty-eight  steps  which  led  to  the  vestibule 
of  St  Peter's  —  every  step  counting  seven  years'  remission  of  penance  ; 
he  knelt  before  all  the  altars  ;  he  listened  reverently  to  all  the  accounts 
given  him  of  the  various  relics  and  believed  them  all ;  he  thought 
that  if  his  parents  had  been  dead,  he  could,  by  saying  masses  in  certain 
chapels,  secure  them  against  purgatory.  He  visited  the  remains  of 
antiquity  which  could  tell  him  something  of  the  life  of  the  old  Romans 
—  the  Pantheon,  the  Coliseum,  and  the  Baths  of  Diocletian. 

But  if  Luther  was  still  unemancipated  from  his  belief  in  relics,  in  the 
effect  of  pilgrimages,  and  in  the  validity  of  Indulgences  for  the  remission 
of  imposed  penance,  his  sturdy  German  piety  and  his  plain  Christian 
morality  turned  his  reverence  of  Rome  into  a  loathing.  The  city  he 
had  greeted  as  holy,  he  found  to  be  a  sink  of  iniquity  ;  its  very  priests 
were  infidel,  and  openly  scoffed  at  the  sacred  services  they  performed  ; 
the  papal  courtiers  were  men  of  depraved  lives  ;  the  Cardinals  of  the 
Church  lived  in  open  sin  ;  he  had  frequent  cause  to  repeat  the  Italian 
proverb,  first  spread  abroad  by  Machiavelli  and  by  Bembo,  "  The  nearer 
Rome  the  worse  Christian."  It  meant  much  for  him  in  after-days  that 
he  had  seen  Rome  for  himself. 

Luther  was  back  in  Wittenberg  early  in  the  summer  of  1512. 
Staupitz  sent  him  to  Erfurt  to  complete  the  steps  necessary  for  the 
higher  graduation  in  Theology,  preparatory  to  succeeding  Staupitz  in 
the  Chair  of  Theology  in  Wittenberg.  He  graduated  as  Doctor  of  the 
Holy  Scripture,  took  the  Wittenberg  doctor's  oath  to  defend  evangelical 
truth  vigorously  (viriliter),  was  made  a  member  of  the  Senate  three 
days  later,  and  a  few  weeks  after  he  succeeded  Staupitz  as  Professor  of 
Theology. 

From  the  first  Luther's  lectures  differed  from  what  were  then  expected 
from  a  professor  of  theology.  It  was  not  that  he  criticised  the  theology 
then  current  in  the  Church  ;  he  had  an  entirely  different  idea  of  what 
theology  ought  to  be,  and  of  what  it  ought  to  make  known.  His  whole 
habit  of  mind  was  practical,  and  theology  for  him  was  an  "  experimental " 
discipline.  It  ought  to  be,  he  thought,  a  study  which  would  teach  how 
a  man  could  find  the  grace  of  God,  and,  having  found  it,  how  he  could 


1513-5]  Luther^ s  teaching  at  Wittenberg  119 

persevere  in  a  life  of  joyous  obedience  to  God  and  His  commandments. 
He  had,  himself,  sought,  and  that  with  deadly  earnest,  an  answer  to  this 
question  in  all  the  material  which  the  Church  of  the  time  had  accumu- 
lated to  aid  men  in  the  task.  He  had  tried  to  find  it  in  the  penitential 
system,  in  the  means  of  grace,  in  theology  professedly  based  on  Holy 
Scripture  expounded  by  the  later  Schoolmen  and  Mystics,  and  his  search 
had  been  in  vain.  But  theologians  like  Bernard  and  Augustine  had 
helped  him,  and  as  they  had  taught  him  he  could  teach  others.  That 
was  the  work  he  set  himself  to  do.  It  was  a  task  to  which  contemporary 
theology  had  not  given  any  special  prominence,  and  which,  in  Luther's 
opinion,  it  had  ignored.  His  theology  was  new,  because  in  his  opinion 
it  ought  to  be  occupied  with  a  new  task,  not  because  the  conclusions 
reached  by  contemporary  theology  occupied  with  other  tasks  were  neces- 
sarily wrong. 

Luther  never  knew  much  Hebrew,  and  he  used  the  Vulgate  in  his 
prelections.  He  had  a  huge,  widely  printed  volume  on  his  desk,  and 
wrote  the  heads  of  his  lectures  between  the  printed  lines.  The  pages 
still  exist  and  can  be  studied.  We  can  trace  the  gradual  growth  of  his 
theology.  In  the  years  1513-15  there  is  no  sign  of  any  attack  upon 
the  contemporary  Scholastic  teaching,  no  thought  but  that  the  monastic 
life  is  the  flower  of  Christian  piety.  He  expounded  the  Psalms  ;  his  aids 
are  what  are  called  the  mystical  passages  in  St  Augustine  and  in  Bernard, 
but  what  may  be  more  properly  termed  those  portions  of  their  teaching 
in  which  they  insist  upon  and  describe  personal  religion.  These  thoughts 
simply  push  aside  the  ordinary  theology  of  the  day  without  staying  to 
criticise  it.  We  can  discern  in  the  germ  what  grew  to  be  the  main 
thoughts  in  the  later  Lutheran  theology.  Men  are  redeemed  apart  from 
any  merits  of  their  own;  man  s  faith  is  trust  in  the  verity  of  God  and 
in  the  historical  work  of  Christ.  These  thoughts  were  for  the  most  part 
expressed  in  the  formulae  common  to  the  Scholastic  philosophy  of  the 
time;  but  they  grew  in  clearness  of  expression,  and  took  shape  as  a 
series  of  propositions  which  formed  the  basis  of  his  teaching  —  that  man 
wins  pardon  through  the  free  grace  of  God,  that  when  man  lays  hold 
on  God's  promise  of  pardon  he  becomes  a  new  creature,  that  this  sense 
of  pardon  is  the  beginning  of  a  new  life  of  sanctification.  To  these 
may  be  added  the  thoughts  that  the  life  of  faith  is  Christianity  on  its 
inward  side;  that  the  contrast  between  the  economy  of  law  and  that 
of  grace  is  something  fundamental;  and  that  there  is  a  real  distinction 
to  be  drawn  between  the  outward  and  visible  Church  and  the  ideal 
Church,  which  is  to  be  described  by  its  spiritual  and  moral  relations 
to  God  after  the  manner  of  Augustine.  The  years  1515  and  1516 
give  traces  of  a  more  thorough  study  of  Augustine  and  of  the  German 
Mystics.  This  comes  out  in  the  college  lectures  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  and  in  some  minor  publications.  His  language  loses  its 
scholastic  colouring  and  adopts  many  of  the  well-known  mystical  phrases, 


120  Gradual  change  in  Luther's  position  [l5l5-7 

especially  when  he  describes  the  natural  incapacity  of  men  for  what  is 
good.  Along  Avith  this  change  in  language,  and  evidently  related  to  it, 
we  find  evidence  that  Luther  was  beginning  to  think  less  highly  of  the 
monastic  life  and  its  external  renunciations.  Predestination,  meaning 
by  that  not  an  abstract  metaphysical  dogma,  but  the  thought  that  the 
whole  of  the  believer's  life  and  what  it  involved  depended  in  the  last 
resort  on  God  and  not  on  man,  came  more  and  more  into  the  foreground. 
Still  there  did  not  appear  any  disposition  to  criticise  or  repudiate  the 
current  theology  of  the  day. 

But  about  the  middle  of  1516  Luther  had  reached  the  parting  of 
the  ways,  and  the  divergence  appeared  on  the  practical  and  not  on 
the  speculative  side  of  theology.  It  began  in  a  sermon  he  preached  on  the 
theory  of  Indulgences  in  July,  1516,  and  increased  month  by  month  —  the 
widening  divergence  can  be  clearly  traced  step  by  step  —  until  he  could 
contrast "  our  theology,"  the  theology  taught  by  Luther  and  hiscolleagues 
at  Wittenberg,  with  what  was  taught  elsewhere  and  notably  at  Erfurt. 
The  former  represented  Augustine  and  the  Bible;  the  latter  was  founded 
on  Aristotle.  In  September,  1517,  his  position  had  become  so  clear  that 
he  wrote  against  the  scholastic  theology,  declaring  that  it  was  at  heart 
Pelagian  and  that  it  obscured  and  buried  out  of  sight  the  Augustinian 
doctrines  of  grace.  He  bewailed  the  fact  that  the  current  theology 
neglected  to  teach  the  supreme  value  of  faith  and  of  inward  righteous- 
ness, that  it  encouraged  men  to  seek  to  escape  the  due  reward  of  sin  by 
means  of  Indulgences,  instead  of  exhorting  them  to  practise  that  inward 
repentance  which  belongs  to  every  genuine  Christian  life.  It  was  at  this 
stage  of  his  own  inward  religious  development  that  Luther  felt  himself 
forced  to  stand  forth  in  public  in  opposition  to  the  sale  of  Indulgences 
in  Germany. 

.  Luther  had  become  much  more  than  a  professor  of  theology  by  this 
time.  He  had  become  a  power  in  Wittenberg.  His  lectures  seemed 
like  a  revelation  of  the  Scriptures  to  the  Wittenberg  students  ;  grave 
burghers  from  the  town  matriculated  at  the  University  in  order  to  attend 
his  classes  ;  his  fame  gradually  spread,  and  students  began  to  flock  from 
all  parts  of  Germany  to  the  small,  poor,  and  remote  town ;  and  the 
Elector  grew  proud  of  his  University  and  of  the  man  who  had  given  it 
such  a  position.  In  these  earlier  years  of  his  professoriate  Luther  under- 
took the  duties  of  the  preacher  in  the  town  church  in  Wittenberg. 
He  became  a  great  preacher,  able  to  touch  the  conscience  and  bring 
men  to  amend  their  lives.  Like  all  great  preachers  of  the  day  who 
were  in  earnest  he  denounced  prevalent  sins  ;  he  deplored  the  low 
standard  set  by  the  leaders  of  the  Church  in  principle  and  in  practice  ; 
he  declared  that  religion  was  not  an  easy  thing ;  that  it  did  not  consist 
in  externals  ;  that  both  sin  and  true  repentance  had  their  roots  in  the 
heart  ;  and  that  until  the  heart  had  been  made  pure  all  kinds  of  external 
purifications  were  useless.     Such  a  man,  occupying  the  position  he  had 


1517]  Tetzel  and  Indulgences  121 

won,  could  not  keep  silent  when  he  saw  what  he  believed  to  be  a  great 
source  of  moral  corruption  gathering  round  him  and  infecting  the  people 
whom  he  taught  daily,  and  who  had  selected  him  as  their  confessor  and 
the  religious  guide  of  their  lives. 

Luther  began  his  work  as  a  Reformer  in  an  attack  on  what  was  called 
an  Indulgence  proclaimed  in  1513  by  Pope  Leo  X,  farmed  by  Albert  of 
Brandenburg,  Archbishop  of  Mainz,  and  preached  by  John  Tetzel,  a 
Dominican  monk  who  had  been  commissioned  by  Albert  to  sell  for  him 
the  "  papal  letters,"  as  the  Indulgence  tickets  were  called.  The  money 
raised  was  to  be  devoted  to  the  building  of  St  Peter's  Church  in  Rome, 
and  to  raise  a  tomb  worthy  of  the  great  Apostle  who,  it  was  said,  lay 
in  a  Roman  grave.  People  had  come  to  be  rather  sceptical  about  the 
destination  of  moneys  raised  by  Indulgences  ;  but  the  buyers  had  their 
"  papal  letters,"  and  it  did  not  much  matter  to  them  where  the  money 
went  after  it  had  left  their  pockets.  The  seller  of  Indulgences  had 
generally  a  magnificent  welcome  when  he  entered  a  German  town.  He 
drew  near  it  in  the  centre  of  a  procession  with  the  Bull  announcing  the 
Indulgence,  carried  before  him  on  a  cloth  of  gold  and  velvet,  and  all  the 
priests  and  monks  of  the  town,  the  Burgomaster  and  Town  Council,  the 
teachers  and  the  school-children  and  a  crowd  of  citizens  went  out  to 
meet  him  with  banners  and  lighted  candles,  and  escorted  him  into  the 
town  singing  hymns.  When  the  gates  were  reached  all  the  bells  began 
to  ring,  the  church-organs  were  played,  the  crowd,  with  the  commissary 
in  their  midst,  streamed  into  the  principal  church,  where  a  great  red 
cross  was  erected  and  the  Pope's  banner  displayed.  Then  followed 
sermons  and  speeches  by  the  commissary  and  his  attendants  extolling 
the  Indulgence,  narrating  its  wonderful  virtues,  and  inviting  the  people 
to  buy.  The  Elector  of  Saxony  had  refused  to  allow  the  commissary  to 
enter  his  territories;  but  the  commissary  could  approach  most  parts 
of  the  Elector's  dominions  without  actually  crossing  the  boundaries. 
Tetzel  had  come  to  Jiiterbogk  in  Magdeburg  territory  and  Zerbst  in 
Anhalt,  and  had  opened  the  sale  of  Indulgences  there ;  and  people  from 
Wittenberg  had  gone  to  these  places  and  made  purchases.  They  had 
brought  their  "  papal  letters  "  to  Luther  and  had  demanded  that  he 
should  acknowledge  their  efficacy.  He  had  refused  ;  the  buyers  had 
complained  to  Tetzel  and  the  commissary  had  uttered  threats  ;  Luther 
felt  himself  in  great  perplexity.  The  Indulgence,  and  the  addresses  by 
which  it  was  commended,  he  knew,  were  doing  harm  to  poor  souls  ;  he 
got  the  letter  of  instructions  given  to  Tetzel  by  his  employer,  the 
Archbishop  of  Mainz,  and  his  heart  waxed  wroth  against  it.  Still  at 
the  basis  of  the  Indulgence,  bad  as  it  was,  Luther  thought  that  there 
was  a  great  truth  ;  that  it  is  the  business  of  the  Church  to  declare  the 
free  and  sovereign  grace  of  God  apart  from  all  human  satisfactions. 

The  practice  of  Indulgences  was,  in  his  days,  universal  and  perme- 
ated the  whole  Church  life  of  the  times.     A  large  number  of  the  pious 


122  The  practice  of  Indulgences  [1517 

associations  among  laymen,  which  formed  so  marked  a  feature  of  the 
fifteenth  century  piety,  were  founded  on  ideas  that  lay  at  the  basis  of 
the  practice  of  granting  Indulgences.  Pious  Christians  of  the  fifteenth 
century  accepted  the  religious  machinery  of  their  Church  as  unquestion- 
ingly  and  as  quietly  as  they  did  the  laws  of  nature.  That  machinery 
included  among  other  things  an  inexhaustible  treasury  of  good  works  — 
of  prayers,  fastings,  mortifications  of  all  kinds  —  which  holy  men  and 
women  had  done,  and  which  might  be  of  service  to  others,  if  the  Pope 
could  only  be  persuaded  to  transfer  them.  When  a  pious  confraternity 
was  formed,  the  Pope,  it  was  believed,  could  transfer  to  the  credit  of  the 
community  a  mass  of  prayers,  almsgivings,  and  other  ecclesiastical  good 
deeds,  all  of  which  became  for  the  members  of  the  confraternity  what  a 
bank  advance  is  to  a  man  starting  in  business.  Some  of  these  associ- 
ations bought  their  spiritual  treasure  from  the  Pope  for  so  much  cash, 
but  there  was  not  always  any  buying  or  selling.  There  was  none  in 
the  celebrated  association  of  St  Ursula's  Schiffleifi,  to  which  so  many 
devout  people,  the  Elector  himself  included,  belonged.  Probably 
little  paying  of  cash  took  place  in  the  thirty-two  pious  confraternities 
of  which  Dr  Pfeffinger,  the  trusted  Councillor  of  the  Elector  Frederick, 
was  a  member.  The  machinery  of  the  Church,  however,  secured  this 
advantage,  that  if  by  any  accident  the  members  of  the  association  failed 
in  praying  as  they  had  promised,  they  had  always  this  transferred 
treasure  to  fall  back  upon.  There  could  be  little  difference  in  principle 
between  the  Pope  transferring  a  mass  of  spiritual  benefits  to  a  pious 
brotherhood,  and  his  handing  over  an  indefinite  amount  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Mainz  to  be  disposed  of,  as  the  prelate  thought  fit,  through 
Tetzel  or  others. 

Moreover,  it  must  be  remembered  that  in  the  course  of  Luther's  re- 
ligious life  down  to  1517  there  are  no  traces  of  anything  quixotic  ;  and 
that  is  a  wonderful  proof  of  the  simplicity  and  strength  of  his  character. 
He  had  something  of  a  contempt  for  men  who  believe  that  they  are 
born  to  set  the  world  right ;  he  compared  them  to  a  player  at  ninepins 
who  imagines  he  can  knock  down  twelve  pins  when  there  are  only 
nine  standing.  It  was  only  after  much  hesitation  and  deep  distress  of 
mind  that  he  felt  compelled  to  interfere,  and  it  was  his  intense  earnest- 
ness in  the  practical  moral  life  of  his  townsmen  that  compelled  him  to 
step  forward.  When  he  did  intervene  he  went  about  the  matter  with 
a  mixture  of  prudence  and  courage  which  were  eminently  characteristic 
of  the  man. 

The  Castle  Church  of  Wittenberg  had  always  been  closely  connected 
with  the  University,  and  its  doors  had  been  used  for  publication  of 
important  academic  documents  ;  notices  of  public  disputations  on 
theological  matters,  common  enough  at  the  time,  had  doubtless  often 
been  seen  figuring  there.  The  day  of  the  year  which  drew  the  largest 
concourse  of  townsmen  and  strangers  to  the  church  was  the  first  of 


1517]  Publication  of  Luther^ s  Theses  123 

November,  All  Saints'  Day.  It  was  the  anniversary  of  the  consecration 
of  the  Church,  was  commemorated  by  a  prolonged  series  of  services, 
and  the  benefits  of  an  Indulgence  were  secured  to  all  who  took  part 
in  them.  At  noon  on  All  Saints'  Day,  Luther  nailed  his  Ninety-five 
Theses  to  the  door  of  the  church.  It  was  an  academic  proceeding.  A 
doctor  in  theology  offered  to  hold  a  disputation,  such  was  the  usual 
term,  for  the  purpose  of  explaining  the  efficacy  of  the  Indulgence. 
The  explanation  had  ninety-five  heads  or  propositions,  all  of  which 
"Doctor  Martin  Luther,  theologian,"  offered  to  make  good  against  all 
comers.  The  subject,  judged  by  the  numberless  books  which  had  been 
written  upon  it,  was  eminently  suitable  for  debate  ;  the  propositions 
offered  were  to  be  matters  of  discussion  ;  and  the  author  was  not  sup- 
posed, according  to  the  usage  of  the  times,  to  be  definitely  committed 
to  the  opinions  he  had  expressed  ;  they  were  simply  heads  of  debate. 
The  document  differed  however  from  most  academic  disputations  in  this, 
that  everyone  wished  to  read  it.  A  duplicate  was  made  in  German. 
Copies  of  the  Latin  original  and  of  the  German  translation  were  sent  to 
the  University  printing-house  and  the  presses  there  could  not  throw 
them  off  fast  enough  to  meet  the  demand  which  came  from  all  parts 
of  Germany, 

The  question  which  Luther  raised  in  his  theses  was  a  difficult  one  ; 
the  theological  doctrine  of  Indulgences  was  one  of  the  most  complicated 
of  the  times,  and  ecclesiastical  opinion  on  many  of  the  points  involved 
was  doubtful.  It  was  part  of  the  penitential  system  of  the  medieval 
Church,  and  had  changed  from  time  to  time  according  to  the  changes 
in  that  system.  Indeed  it  may  be  said  that  in  the  matter  of  Indulgences 
doctrine  had  always  been  framed  to  justify  practices  and  changes  in  prac- 
tice.   The  beginnings  go  back  a  thousand  years  before  the  time  of  Luther. 

In  the  ancient  Church  serious  sins  involved  separation  from  the 
fellowship  of  Christians,  and  readmission  to  the  communion  was  de- 
pendent not  merely  on  public  confession  but  also  on  the  manifestation 
of  a  true  repentance  by  the  performance  of  certain  satisfactions,  such  as 
the  manumission  of  slaves,  prolonged  fastings,  extensive  almsgiving  ; 
which  were  supposed  to  be  well-pleasing  in  God's  sight,  and  were  also 
the  warrant  for  the  community  that  the  penitent  might  be  again  re- 
ceived within  their  midst.  It  often  happened  that  these  satisfactions  were 
mitigated  ;  penitents  might  fall  sick  and  the  prescribed  fasting  could 
not  be  insisted  upon  without  danger  of  death  —  in  which  case  the  impos- 
sible satisfaction  could  be  exchanged  for  an  easier  one,  or  the  community 
might  be  convinced  of  the  sincerity  of  the  repentance  without  insisting 
that  the  prescribed  satisfaction  should  be  fully  performed.  These  ex- 
changes and  mitigations  are  the  germs  out  of  which  Indulgences  grew. 

In  course  of  time  the  public  confessions  became  private  confessions 
made  to  a  priest,  and  the  satisfactions  private  satisfactions  imposed  by 
the  confessor.     This  change  involved  among  other  things  a  wider  circle 


124  ChcuKjes  m  the  character  of  Indulgences 

of  sins  to  be  confessed  —  sins  of  thought,  the  sources  of  sinful  actions, 
brought  to  light  by  the  confessor's  questions  ;  and  different  satisfactions 
were  imposed  at  the  discretion  of  the  priest  corresponding  to  the  sins 
confessed.  This  led  to  the  construction  of  penitentiaries  containing  lists 
of  penances  supposed  to  be  proportionate  to  the  sins.  In  many  cases 
the  penances  were  very  severe  and  extended  over  a  long  course  of  years. 
From  the  seventh  century  there  arose  a  system  of  commutations  of 
penances.  A  penance  of  several  years'  practice  of  fasting  might  be 
commuted  into  saying  so  many  prayers  or  psalms,  giving  prescribed  alms 
or  even  into  a  money  fine  —  and  in  this  last  case  the  analogy  of  the 
Wergeld  of  the  Germanic  codes  was  frequently  followed.  This  new 
custom  commonly  took  the  form  that  anyone  who  visited  a  prescribed 
church  on  a  day  that  was  named  and  gave  a  contribution  to  the  funds 
of  the  church  had  his  penance  shortened  by  one-seventh,  one-third, 
one-half,  as  the  case  might  be.  This  was  in  every  case  a  commutation 
of  a  penance  which  had  been  imposed  according  to  the  regulations  of 
the  Church  (relaxatio  de  i7ijuncta  poenitentid) .  This  power  of  commut- 
ing imposed  penance  was  usually  supposed  to  be  in  the  hands  of  Bishops 
and  was  used  by  them  to  provide  funds  for  the  building  of  their  great 
churches.  But  priests  for  a  time  also  thought  themselves  entitled  to 
follow  the  episcopal  example  ;  and  did  so  until  the  great  abuse  of  the 
system  made  the  Church  insist  that  the  power  should  be  strictly  kept 
in  episcopal  hands.  Thus  the  real  origin  of  Indulgences  is  to  be  found 
in  the  relaxation  by  the  Church  of  a  portion  of  the  ecclesiastical  penal- 
ties imposed  according  to  regular  custom. 

Three  conceptions,  however,  combined  to  effect  a  series  of  changes 
in  the  character  of  Indulgences,  all  of  which  were  in  operation  in  the 
beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.  These  were  the  formulation  of 
the  thought  of  a  Treasury  of  merits,  the  change  of  the  institution  of 
penance  into  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  and  the  distinction  between 
attrition  and  contrition.  The  two  former  led  to  the  belief  that  the 
Pope  alone  had  the  power  to  grant  Indulgences  —  the  treasure  needed  a 
guardian  to  prevent  its  being  squandered  ;  and,  when  Indulgences  were 
judged  to  be  extra-sacramental  and  a  matter  of  jurisdiction  and  not  of 
Orders,  they  belonged  to  the  Pope,  whose  jurisdiction  was  supreme. 

The  conception  of  a  Treasury  of  merits  was  first  formulated  by 
Alexander  of  Hales  in  the  thirteenth  century,  and  his  ideas  were  accepted 
and  stated  with  more  precision  by  the  great  Schoolmen  who  followed  him. 
Starting  with  the  existing  practice  in  the  Church  that  some  penances, 
such  for  example  as  pilgrimages,  might  be  performed  vicariously,  and 
bringing  togetlier  the  conceptions  that  all  the  faithful  are  one  community, 
tliat  the  good  deeds  of  all  the  members  are  the  common  property  of  all, 
tliat  sinners  may  benefit  by  the  good  deeds  of  their  fellows,  that  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  is  sufficient  to  wipe  out  the  sins  of  all,  theologians 
gradually  formulated  the  doctrine  that  there  was  a  common  storehouse 


Treasury  of  merits.     Sacrament  of  Penance       125 

containing  the  good  deeds  of  living  men,  of  the  saints  in  heaven, 
and  the  inexhaustible  merits  of  Christ,  and  that  the  merits  there 
accumulated  had  been  placed  in  the  charge  of  the  Pope  and  could  be 
dispensed  by  him  to  the  faithful.  The  doctrine  was  not  thoroughly- 
defined  in  the  fifteenth  century,  but  it  was  generally  accepted  and 
increased  the  power  and  resources  of  the  Pope.  It  had  one  immediate 
consequence  on  the  theory  of  Indulgences.  They  were  no  longer  re- 
garded as  the  substitution  of  some  enjoined  work  for  a  canonical 
penance  ;  they  could  be  looked  upon  as  an  absolute  equivalent  of 
what  was  due  to  God,  paid  over  to  Him  out  of  this  Treasury  of 
merits. 

When  the  institution  became  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  it  was 
divided  into  three  parts  —  Contrition,  Confession,  and  Satisfaction;  and 
Absolution  was  made  to  accompany  Confession  and  therefore  to  precede 
Satisfaction,  which  it  had  formerly  followed.  Satisfaction  lost  its  old 
meaning.  It  was  not  the  outward  sign  of  inward  sorrow,  the  test  of 
fitness  for  pardon,  and  the  necessary  precedent  of  Absolution.  According 
to  the  new  theory.  Absolution,  which  followed  Confession  and  preceded 
Satisfaction,  had  the  effect  of  removing  the  whole  guilt  of  the  sins 
confessed,  and,  with  the  guilt,  the  whole  of  the  eternal  punishment  due  ; 
but  this  cancelling  of  guilt  and  of  eternal  punishment  did  not  open 
straightway  the  gates  of  Heaven.  It  was  thought  that  the  Divine 
righteousness  could  not  permit  the  bajjtised  sinner  to  escape  all  punish- 
ment ;  so  the  idea  of  temporal  punishment  was  introduced,  and  these 
poenae  fe»?j9o/'a?es,  strictly  distinguished  from  the  eternal,  included  punish- 
ment in  Purgatory.  The  pains  of  Purgatory  therefore  were  not  included 
in  the  Absolution,  and  everyone  must  suffer  these  had  not  God  in  His 
mercy  provided  an  alternative  in  temporal  Satisfactions.  This  gave 
rise  to  a  great  uncertainty ;  for  who  could  have  the  assurance  that  the 
priest  in  imposing  the  Satisfaction  or  penance  had  calculated  rightly 
and  had  assigned  the  equivalent  which  the  righteousness  of  God  de- 
manded ?  It  was  here  that  the  new  idea  of  Indulgences  came  in  to  aid 
the  faithful.  Indulgences  in  the  sense  of  relaxations  of  imposed  penance 
went  into  the  background,  and  the  valuable  Indulgence  was  what  would 
secure  against  the  pains  of  Purgatory.  Thus  in  the  opinion  of  Alexander 
of  Hales,  of  Bonaveutura,  and  above  all  of  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  real 
value  of  Indulgences  is  that  they  procure  the  remission  of  penalties  after 
Contrition,  Confession,  and  Absolution,  whether  these  penalties  have 
been  imposed  by  the  priest  or  not  ;  and  when  the  uncertainty  of  the 
imposed  penalties  is  considered.  Indulgences  are  most  valuable  with 
regard  to  the  unimposed  penalties  ;  the  priest  might  make  a  mistake, 
but  God  does  not. 

While,  as  has  been  seen.  Indulgences  were  always  related  to  Satis- 
factions and  changed  in  character  with  the  changes  introduced  into  the 
meaning  of  these,  they  were  not  less  closely  affected  by  the  distinction 


126       Distinction  between  Attrition  and  Contrition 


wliich  came  to  be  drawn  between  Attrition  and  Contrition.  Until  the 
thirteenth  century  it  was  always  held  that  Contrition  or  a  condition  of 
real  sorrow  for  sin  was  the  one  thing  taken  into  account  in  the  according 
of  pardon  to  the  sinner.  The  theologians  of  that  century  however  began 
to  make  a  distinction  between  Contrition,  or  godly  sorrow,  and  Attrition, 
a  certain  amount  of  sorrow  which  might  arise  from  a  variety  of  causes  of 
a  more  or  less  unworthy  nature.  It  was  held  that  this  Attrition,  though 
of  itself  too  imperfect  to  win  the  pardon  of  God,  could  become  perfected 
through  the  Confession  heard  by  the  priest  and  the  Absolution  ad- 
ministered by  him.  When  this  idea  was  jjlaced  in  line  with  the 
thoughts  developed  as  to  the  nature  of  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  it 
followed  that  the  weaker  the  form  of  sorrow  and  the  greater  the  sins  con- 
fessed and  absolved,  the  heavier  Avere  the  temporal  penalties  demanded 
by  the  righteousness  of  God.  Indulgences  appealed  strongly  to  the  indif- 
ferent Christian  who  knew  that  he  had  sinned,  and  who  knew  at  the  same 
time  that  his  sorrow  did  not  amount  to  Contrition.  His  conscience, 
however  weak,  told  him  that  he  could  not  sin  with  perfect  impunity  and 
that  something  more  was  needed  than  his  perfunctory  confession  and  the 
absolution  of  the  priest.  He  felt  that  he  must  make  some  amends  ;  that 
he  must  perform  some  satisfying  act,  or  obtain  an  Indulgence  at  some 
cost  to  himself.  Hence,  for  the  ordinary  indifferent  Christian,  Attrition, 
Confession,  and  Indulgence  stood  forth  as  the  three  great  heads  of  the 
scheme  of  the  Church  for  his  salvation. 

This  doctrine  of  Attrition  and  its  applications  had  not  the  undivided 
support  of  the  Church  of  the  later  Middle  Ages,  but  it  was  the  doctrine 
which  was  taught  by  most  of  the  Scotist  divines  who  took  the  lead  in 
theological  thinking  during  these  times.  It  was  taught  in  its  most 
pronounced  form  by  such  a  representative  man  as  John  von  Palz,  who 
was  professor  of  theology  in  the  Erfurt  monastery  when  Luther  entered 
upon  his  monastic  career  ;  it  was  preached  by  the  Indulgence  sellers  ; 
it  was  specially  valuable  in  securing  good  sales  of  Indulgences  and 
therefore  in  increasing  the  papal  profits.  It  lay  at  the  basis  of  that 
whole  doctrine  and  practice  of  Indulgences  which  confronted  Luther 
when  lie  felt  himself  compelled  to  attack  them. 

The  practice  of  Indulgences,  on  whatever  theory  they  were  upheld, 
had  enmeshed  the  whole  penitentiary  system  of  the  Church  in  the 
thirteenth,  fourteenth,  and  fifteenth  centuries.  The  papal  power  was  at 
first  sparingly  used.  It  is  true  that  in  1095  Pope  Urban  II  promised 
an  Indulgence  to  the  Crusaders  such  as  had  never  before  been  heard 
of  — namely,  a  plenary  Indulgence  or  a  complete  remission  of  all 
imposed  canonical  penances  —  but  it  was  not  until  the  thirteenth  and 
fourteenth  centuries  that  Indulgences  were  lavished  by  the  Pope  even 
more  unsparingly  than  tliey  had  been  previously  by  the'  Bishops.  From 
the  beginning  of  the  tliirteenth  century  they  were  promised  in  order  to 
find  recruits  for  wars  against  heretics,  such  as  the  Albigenses,  against 


Lavish  use  of  Indulgences  127 

opponents  of  papal  political  schemes  —  in  short  to  recruit  the  papal 
armies  for  wars  of  all  kinds.  They  were  granted  freely  to  the  religious 
Orders,  either  for  the  benefits  of  the  members  or  as  rewards  to  the 
faithful  who  visited  their  churches  and  made  contributions  to  their 
funds.  They  were  bestowed  on  special  churches  or  cathedrals,  or  on 
altars  in  churches,  and  had  the  effect  of  endowments.  They  were 
given  to  hospitals,  and  for  the  rebuilding,  repair,  and  upkeep  of 
bridges  —  the  Elector  had  one  attached  to  his  bridge  at  Torgau  and  had 
employed  Tetzel  to  preach  its  benefits.  They  were  attached  to  special 
collections  of  relics  to  be  earned  by  the  faithful  who  visited  the  shrines. 
In  short  it  is  difficult  to  say  to  what  they  were  not  given  and  for  what 
money-getting  purpose  they  had  not  been  employed.  The  Fuggers 
amassed  much  of  their  wealth  from  commissions  received  in  managing 
these  Indulgences.  But  perhaps  it  may  be  said  that  the  Indulgence 
system  reached  its  height  in  the  great  Jubilee  Indulgences  which  were 
granted  by  successive  Popes  beginning  with  Boniface  VIII.  They  were 
first  bestowed  on  pilgrims  who  actually  visited  Rome  and  prayed  at 
prescribed  times  within  certain  churches  ;  then,  the  same  Indulgence 
came  to  be  bestowed  on  persons  who  were  willing  to  give  at  least  what 
a  journey  to  Rome  would  have  cost  them  ;  and  in  the  end  the}'  could 
be  had  on  much  easier  terms.  Wherever  Indulgences  are  met  with 
they  are  surrounded  with  a  sordid  system  of  money-getting' ;  and,  as 
Luther  said  in  a  sermon  which  he  preached  on  the  subject  before  he 
had  prepared  his  Theses,  they  were  a  very  grievous  instrument  to  be 
placed  in  the  hands  of  avarice. 

The  theories  of  theologians  had  always  followed  the  custom  of  the 
Church  ;  Indulgences  existed  and  had  to  be  explained.  This  is  the 
attitude  of  the  two  great  Schoolmen,  Bonaventura  and  Thomas  Aquinas, 
who  did  more  than  any  other  theologians  to  provide  a  theological  basis 
for  the  practice.  The  practice  itself  had  altered  and  new  explanations 
had  been  made  to  suit  the  alterations.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  the 
theological  explanations  did  not  always  agree,  and  that  sometimes  the 
terms  of  the  proclamation  of  an  Indulgence  went  beyond  the  theories 
of  many  of  the  theological  defenders  of  the  sj^stem.  To  take  one 
instance.  Did  an  Indulgence  give  remission  for  the  guilt  of  sin  or  only 
for  certain  penalties  attached  to  sinful  deeds  ?  This  is  a  matter  still 
keenly  debated.  The  theory  adopted  by  all  defenders  of  Indulgences 
who  have  written  on  the  subject  since  the  Council  of  Trent  is  that  guilt 
(culpa)  and  eternal  punishment  are  dealt  with  in  the  Sacrament  of 
Penance  ;  and  that  Indulgences  have  to  do  with  temporal  punishments 
only,  including  under  that  phrase  the  penalties  of  Purgatory.  It  is  also 
to  be  admitted  that  this  modern  opinion  is  confirmed  by  the  most  eminent 
medieval  theologians  before  the  Council  of  Trent.  Those  admissions, 
however,  do  not  settle  the  question.  Medieval  theology  did  not  create 
Indulgences  ;  it  only  followed  and  tried  to  justify  the  practices  of  Popes 


128  Luther's  j^ositmi  in  the  Theses  [1517 

and  the  Roman  Curia  —  a  confessedly  difficult  task.  The  question  still 
remains  whether  the  official  documents  did  not  assert  that  Indulgences 
did  remove  guilt  as  well  as  penalty  of  the  temporal  kind.  If  documents 
granting  Indulgences,  published  after  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  had 
been  formulated,  be  examined,  it  will  be  found  that  many  of  them, 
while  proclaiming  the  Indulgence  and  its  benefits,  make  no  mention 
of  the  necessity  of  previous  confession  and  priestly  absolution  ;  that 
others  expressly  assert  that  the  Indulgence  confers  a  remission  of 
guilt  {culpa)  as  well  as  penalty  ;  and  that  very  many,  especially  in  the 
Jubilee  times,  use  language  which  inevitably  led  intelligent  laymen 
(Dante  for  example)  to  believe  that  the  Indulgence  remitted  the  guilt 
as  well  as  the  penalties  of  actual  sins  ;  and  when  all  due  allowance  has 
been  made  it  is  very  difficult  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  Indulgences 
had  been  declared  on  the  highest  authority  to  be  efficacious  for  the 
removal  of  the  guilt  of  sins  in  the  presence  of  God. 

Luther  however  approached  the  whole  question  not  from  the  side  of 
theological  theory  but  from  its  practical  moral  effect  on  the  minds 
of  the  common  people,  wdio  were  not  theologians  and  on  whom  refined 
distinctions  were  throwm  away  ;  and  the  evidence  that  the  people  believed 
that  the  Indulgence  remitted  the  guilt  as  well  as  the  penalties  of  sins  is 
overwhelming.  Putting  aside  the  statements  or  views  of  Hus,  Wiclif, 
and  the  Piers  Plowman  series  of  poems,  contemporary  chroniclers  are 
found  describing  Indulgences  given  for  crusades  or  in  times  of  Jubilee  as 
remissions  of  guilt  as  well  as  of  penalty  ;  contemporary  preachers  dwelt 
on  the  distinction  between  the  partial  and  the  plenary  Indulgence, 
asserted  that  the  latter  meant  remission  of  guilt  as  well  as  of  penalty, 
and  explained  their  statements  by  insisting  that  the  plenary  Indulgence 
included  within  it  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  ;  tlie  popular  guide-books 
written  for  pilgrims  to  Rome  and  Compostella  spread  the  popular  ideas 
about  Indulgences,  and  this  without  any  interference  from  the  ecclesi- 
astical authorities.  The  MirahiUa  Romeae,  a  very  celebrated  guide-book 
for  pilgrims  to  Rome,  which  had  gone  through  nineteen  Latin  and 
twelve  German  editions  before  the  year  1500,  says  expressly  that  every 
pilgrim  who  visits  the  Lateran  has  forgiveness  of  all  sins,  of  guilt  as  well 
as  of  penalty,  and  makes  the  same  statement  about  the  virtues  of  the 
Indulgences  given  to  other  shrines.  The  popular  belief  was  so  well 
acknowledged  that  even  Councils  had  to  excuse  themselves  from  having 
fostered  it,  and  did  so  by  laying  the  blame  on  the  preachers  and  sellers 
of  Indulgences,  or,  like  the  Council  of  Constance,  impeached  the  Pope 
and  compelled  him  to  confess  that  he  had  granted  Indulgences  for  the 
remission  of  guilt  as  well  as  of  penalty.  This  widespread  popular  belief 
justified  the  attitude  taken  up  by  Luther. 

But  if  it  be  granted  that  the  intelligent  belief  of  the  Church  as 
found  in  the  writings  of  its  most  respected  theologians  was  that  the 
Indulgence  remitted  the  penalty  and  not  the  guilt  of  sin,  it  is  well  to 


The  character  of  the  Theses  129 

notice  what  this  meant.  Since  the  formulation  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Sacrament  of  Penance,  the  theory  had  been  that  all  guilt  of  sin  and  all 
eternal  punishment  were  remitted  in  the  priestly  Absolution  which 
followed  the  confession  of  the  penitent.  The  Sacrament  of  Penance  had 
abolished  guilt  and  hell.  But  there  remained  actual  sins  to  be  punished 
because  the  righteousness  of  God  demanded  it,  and  this  was  done  in  the 
temporal  pains  of  Purgatory.  The  "  common  man,"  if  he  thought  at  all 
on  the  matter,  might  be  excused  if  he  considered  that  guilt  and  hell,  if 
taken  away  by  the  one  hand,  were  restored  by  the  other,  and  that  the 
whole  series  of  questions  discussed  by  the  theologians  amounted  to 
little  more  than  dialectical  fencing  with  phrases.  He  was  taught  and  he 
believed  that  punishment  awaited  him  for  his  sins  —  and  a  temporal 
punishment  which  might  last  thousands  of  years  was  not  very  different 
from  an  eternal  one  in  his  eyes.  With  these  thoughts  the  Indulgence 
was  offered  to  him  as  a  sure  way  of  easing  his  conscience  and  avoiding 
the  punishment  which  he  knew  to  be  deserved.  He  had  only  to  pay  a 
sum  of  money  and  perform  the  canonical  good  deed  enjoined,  whatever 
it  might  be,  and  he  had  the  remission  of  his  punishment  and  the  sense 
that  God's  justice  was  satisfied.  It  was  this  practical  ethical  effect  of 
the  Indulgences,  and  not  the  theological  explanations  about  them,  which 
stirred  Luther  to  make  his  protest. 

Luther's  Theses,  in  their  lack  of  precise  theological  definition  and  of 
logical  arrangement,  are  singularly  unlike  what  might  have  been  expected 
from  a  professional  theologian  ;  and  they  contain  repetitions  which  might 
easily  have  been  avoided.  They  are  not  a  clearly  reasoned  statement  of 
a  theological  doctrine  ;  still  less  are  they  the  programme  of  a  scheme  of 
reformation.  They  are  simply  ninety-five  sledge-hammer  blows  directed 
against  the  most  flagrant  ecclesiastical  abuse  of  the  age.  They  look 
like  the  utterance  of  a  man  who  was  in  close  contact  with  the  people, 
who  had  been  shocked  at  statements  made  by  the  preachers  of  the  Indul- 
gence, who  had  read  a  good  deal  of  the  current  theological  oi^inions 
published  in  defence  of  Indulgences,  and  had  noted  several  views  which 
he  longed  to  contradict  as  publicly  as  possible.  They  are  prefaced  with 
the  expression  of  love  and  desire  to  elucidate  the  truth.  They  read  as 
if  they  were  addressed  to  the  "  common  man "  and  appealed  to  his 
common  sense  of  spiritual  things.  Luther  had  told  the  assembly  of 
clergy,  who  met  at  Leitzkau  in  1512  to  discuss  the  affairs  of  the  Church, 
that  every  true  reformation  must  begin  with  individual  men,  and  that  it 
must  have  for  its  centre  the  regenerate  heart,  for  its  being  an  awakening 
faith,  and  for  its  inspiration  the  preaching  of  a  pure  Gospel. 

The  note  which  he  sounded  in  this,  his  earliest  utterance  which 
has  come  down  to  us,  is  re-echoed  in  the  Theses.  It  is  heard  in  the 
opening  sentences.  The  penitence  which  Christ  requires  is  something 
more  than  a  momentary  expression  of  sorrow  ;  it  is  an  habitual  thing 
which  lasts  continuously  during  the  whole  of  the  believer's  life  ;  outward 


130  The  character  of  the  Theses 


deeds  of  penitence  are  necessary  to  manifest  the  real  penitence  wliicli  is 
inward  and  which  is  the  source  of  a  continuous  mortification  of  the  flesh  ; 
confession  is  also  a  necessary  thing  because  the  true  penitent  must  be 
prepared  to  humble  himself  ;  but  the  one  thing  needful  is  the  godly 
contrition  of  the  heart.  In  the  Theses  Luther  makes  six  distinct 
assertions  about  Indulgences  and  their  efficacy  :  — (1)  Indulgence  is  and 
can  only  be  the  remission  of  a  canonical  penalty  ;  the  Church  can  remit 
what  the  Church  has  imposed  ;  it  cannot  remit  what  God  has  imposed. 
(2)  An  Indulgence  can  never  remit  guilt ;  the  Pope  himself  is  unable  to 
do  this.  (3)  It  cannot  remit  the  divine  punishment  for  sin —  God  keeps 
that  in  His  own  hands.  (4)  It  has  no  application  to  souls  in  Purgatory  ; 
for  penalties  imposed  by  the  Church  can  only  refer  to  the  living  ;  death 
dissolves  them  ;  all  that  the  Pope  can  do  for  souls  in  Purgatory  is  by 
prayer  and  not  by  any  power  of  keys.  (5)  The  Christian  who  has  true 
repentance  has  already  received  pardon  from  God  altogether  apart  from 
an  Indulgence  and  does  not  need  it ;  and  Christ  demands  this  true 
repentance  from  everyone.  (6)  The  Treasure  of  Merits  has  never  been 
properly  defined,  and  is  not  understood  by  the  people  ;  it  cannot  be  the 
merits  of  Christ  and  the  Saints,  because  these  act  without  any  intervention 
from  the  Pope ;  it  can  mean  nothing  more  than  that  the  Pope,  having 
the  power  of  the  keys,  can  remit  Satisfactions  imposed  by  the  Church ; 
the  true  treasure  of  merits  is  the  hoh^  Gospel  of  the  grace  of  God. 

The  Theses  had  a  circulation  which  for  the  times  was  unprecedented. 
They  were  known  all  over  Germany,  Myconius  assures  us,  within  a 
fortnight.  This  popularity  was  no  doubt  partly  due  to  the  growing 
dislike  of  papal  methods  of  gaining  money ;  but  there  must  have  been 
more  than  that  in  it  ;  Luther  was  only  uttering  aloud  what  thousands 
of  pious  Germans  had  been  thinking.  The  lack  of  all  theological 
treatment  must  have  increased  their  popularity.  The  sentences  were 
plain  and  easily  understood.  They  kept  within  the  field  of  simple 
religious  and  moral  truth.  Their  effect  was  so  immediate  that  the  sales 
of  Indulgences  began  to  decline.  The  Theses  appealed  to  all  those  who 
had  been  brought  up  in  the  simple  evangelical  family  piety  and  who 
had  not  forsaken  it ;  and  they  appealed  also  to  all  who  shared  that  non- 
ecclesiastical  piety  which  had  been  rising  and  spreading  during  the  last 
decades  of  the  fifteenth  century.  Both  these  forces,  purely  religious, 
at  once  rallied  round  the  author. 

Theologians  were  provokingly  silent  about  the  Theses.  Luther's 
intimate  friends,  who  agreed  with  his  opinions,  thought  that  he  had 
acted  with  great  rashness.  His  Bishop  had  told  him  that  he  saw  nothing 
to  ol)ject  to  in  his  declarations,  but  advised  him  to  write  no  more  on  the 
subject.  Before  the  end  of  the  year  Tetzel  published  Counter-Theses, 
written  for  him  by  Conrad  Wimpina.  of  Frankfort  on  the  Oder.  John 
Eck  (Maier),  by  far  the  ablest  of  Luther's  opponents,  had  in  circulation, 
though  probably  unpublished,  an  answer  entitled  0^t'/jsA'«,  which  was  in 


Tlie  character  of  fit'  ThjSts  131 

Luther's  hands  as  earlv  as  March  4.  151 S.  and  was  probably  answered 
by  Luther  on  March  24.  although  the  answer  was  not  published  until 
August.  The  Theses  had  been  sent  to  Rome  by  the  Archbishop  of 
Mainz.  The  Pope.  Leo  X.  thinking  that  they  represented  a  merely 
monkish  qnarreL  contented  himself  with  asking  the  General  of  the 
AtLgustinian  Eremites  to  keep  things  quiet  among  his  monks.  But  at 
Rome.  Silvester  Mazzolini,  called  Prierias  (from  his  birthplace.  Prierio), 
a  Dominican,  Papal  Censor  for  the  Roman  Province  and  an  Inquisitor. 
was  profoundly  dissatisfied  with  Luther's  declarations,  and  answered 
them  in  a  book  entitled  A  Dialogue  about  the  power  of  the  Pope,  against 
the  Preiumptuoui  Conclusions  of  Martin  Luther.  In  ApriL  151S.  the 
Augustinian  Eremites  held  their  usual  annual  chapter  at  Heidelberg, 
and  Luther  went  there  in  spite  of  many  warnings  that  his  life  was  not 
safe  out  of  Wittenberg.  At  these  general  chapters  some  time  was 
always  spent  in  theological  discussion,  and  Luther  at  last  heard  his 
Theses  temperately  discussed.  He  found  the  opposition  to  his  view? 
much  stronger  than  he  had  expected,  but  the  real  discussion  so  pleased 
him  that  he  returned  to  Wittenberg  much  strengthened  and  comforted. 
On  his  return  he  began  a  general  answer  to  his  opponents.  The  book. 
Mesolutiones.  was  probably  the  most  carefully  prepared  of  all  Luther's 
writings. .  It  was  meditated  over  long  and  rewritten  several  times.  It 
contains  an  interesting  and  partly  biographical  dedication  to  Staupitz  : 
it  is  addressed  to  the  Pope  ;  it  sets  forth  a  detailed  defence  of  the 
author's  ninety-five  conclusions  on  the  subject  of  Indulgences. 

If  we  concern  ourselves  with  the  central  position  in  the  attacks  made 
on  Luther's  Theses  it  will  be  found  that  they  amount  to  this  :  that 
Indulgences  are  simply  a  particular  case  of  the  use  of  the  ordinary  power 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Pope  and  are  whatever  the  Pope  means 
them  to  be,  and  that  no  discussion  about  the  precise  kind  of  efficacy 
which  may  be  in  their  use  is  to  be  tolerated.  The  Roman  Church 
is  virtually  the  Universal  Church,  and  the  Pope  is  practically  the  Roman 
Church.  Hence  as  the  Representative  of  the  Roman  Church,  which  in 
turn  represents  the  Universal  Church,  the  Pope,  when  he  acts  officially, 
cannot  err.  Official  decisions  are  given  in  actions  as  well  as  in  words., 
and  custom  has  the  force  of  law.  Therefore  whoever  objects  to  such 
long-established  customs  as  Indulgences  is  a  heretic  and  does  not  deserve 
to  be  heard.  Luther,  in  his  Theses  and  still  more  in  his  Resolutiones. 
had  repudiated  all  the  additions  made  to  the  theory  and  practice  of 
Indulgences  founded  on  papal  action  during  the  three  centuries  past, 
and  all  the  scholastic  subtleties  which  had  attempted  to  justify  thc>se 
practic-es.  The  answers  of  his  opponents,  and  especially  of  Prierias.  had 
barred  all  such  discussion  by  declaring  that  ecclesiastical  usages  were 
matters  of  faith,  and  by  interposing  the  official  infallibility  of  the  Bishop 
of  Rome.  Had  the  question  been  one  of  intellectual  speculation  only. 
it  is  probable  that  the  Pope  would  not  have  placed  himself  behind  his 


132        Luther  summoned  to  answer  for  his  views        [i5i8 

too  zealous  supporters.  The  Church  ^vas  accustomed  to  the  presence  of 
various  schools  of  theology  with  differing  opinions  ;  but  the  Curia  had 
always  been  extremely  sensitive  about  Indulgences  ;  they  were  the  source 
of  an  enormous  revenue,  and  anything  which  checked  their  sale  would 
have  caused  financial  embarrassment.  Hence  it  is  scarcely  to  be  won- 
dered at  that  Pope  Leo  summoned  Luther  to  Rome  to  answer  for  his 
attack  on  the  system  of  Indulgences. 

This  sudden  summons  (July,  1518)  to  appear  before  the  Inquisitorial 
Office  could  be  represented  as  an  affront  to  Wittenberg  ;  and  Luther 
wrote  to  Spalatin,  the  Elector's  chaplain,  and  the  chief  link  between  his 
Court  and  the  University,  suggesting  that  German  princes  ought  to 
defend  the  rights  of  German  universities  attacked  in  his  person. 
Spalatin  immediately  wrote  to  the  Elector  Frederick  and  to  the 
Emperor  Maximilian,  both  of  whom  were  at  Augsburg  at  the  time. 
The  Elector  was  jealous  of  the  rights  of  his  University,  and  he  had  a 
high  regard  for  Luther,  who  had  done  so  much  to  make  his  University 
the  flourishing  seat  of  learning  it  had  become.  The  Emperor's  keen 
political  vision  discerned  a  useful  if  obscure  ally  in  the  young  German 
theologian.  "  Luther  is  sure  to  begin  a  game  with  the  priests,"  he  said  ; 
"  the  Elector  should  take  good  care  of  that  monk,  for  he  will  be  useful  to 
us  some  day."  So  the  Pope  was  urged  to  suspend  the  summons  and 
grant  Luther  a  trial  on  German  soil.  The  matter  was  left  in  the  hands 
of  the  Pope's  Legate  in  Germany,  Cajetan  (Thomas  de  Vio),  and  Luther 
was  ordered  to  present  himself  before  that  official  at  Augsburg. 

When  Luther  had  nailed  his  Theses  to  the  door  of  the  Castle  Church 
at  Wittenberg  he  had  been  a  solitary  monk  driven  imperiously  by  his 
conscience  to  act  alone  and  afraid  to  compromise  any  of  his  friends.  It 
must  have  been  with  very  different  feelings  that  he  started  on  his  journey 
to  meet  the  Cardinal-Legate  at  Augsburg.  He  knew  that  the  Theses 
had  won  for  him  numberless  sympathisers.  His  correspondence  shows 
that  his  University  was  with  him  to  a  man.  The  students  were  en- 
thusiastic and  thronged  his  class-room.  His  theology  — theology  based 
on  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  on  Augustine  and  Bernard  —  was  spreading 
rapidly  through  the  convents  of  his  Order  in  Germany  and  even  in  the 
Netherlands.  iMelanchthon  had  come  to  Wittenberg  on  the  25th  of 
August ;  he  had  begun  to  lecture  on  Homer  and  on  the  Epistle  to  Titus  ; 
and  Luther  was  exulting  in  the  thought  that  his  University  would  soon 
show  German  scholarship  able  to  match  itself  against  the  Italian.  The 
days  were  fast  disappearing,  he  wrote,  when  the  Romans  could  cheat 
the  Germans  with  their  intrigues,  trickeries,  and  treacheries  ;  treat  them 
as  blockheads  and  boors  ;  and  gull  them  continuously  and  shamelessly. 
As  for  the  Pope,  he  was  not  to  be  moved  by  what  pleased  or  displeased 
his  Holiness.  The  Pope  was  a  man  as  Luther  himself  was  ;  and  many 
a  Pope  had  been  guilty  not  merely  of  errors  but  of  crimes.  At  quieter 
moments,  however,  he  was  oppressed  with  the  thought  that  it  had  been 


1518]  Luther  at  Augsburg  133 

laid  on  him  who  hated  publicity,  who  loved  to  keep  quiet  and  teach  his 
students  and  preach  to  his  people,  to  stand  forth  as  he  had  felt  compelled 
to  do.  The  patriot,  the  prophet  of  a  new  era,  the  humble,  almost 
shrinking  Christian  monk  —  all  these  characters  appear  in  his  correspond- 
ence with  his  intimates  in  the  autumn  of  1518. 

The  Diet,  which  had  just  closed  when  Luther  reached  Augsburg,  had 
witnessed  some  brilliant  scenes.  A  Cardinal's  hat  had  been  bestowed 
on  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz  with  all  gorgeous  solemnities  ;  the  aged 
Emperor  Maximilian  had  been  solemnly  presented  with  the  pilgrimage 
symbols  of  a  hat  and  a  dagger,  both  blessed  by  the  Pope.  His  Holiness 
invited  Germany  to  unite  in  a  crusade  against  the  Turks,  and  the  Emperor 
would  have  willingly  appeared  as  the  champion  of  Christendom.  But 
the  German  Princes,  spiritual  and  secular,  were  in  no  mood  to  fulfil  any 
demands  made  from  Rome.  The  spirit  of  revolt  had  not  yet  taken: 
active  shape,  but  it  could  be  expressed  in  a  somewhat  sullen  refusal  to 
agree  to  the  Pope's  proposals.  The  Emperor  recognised  the  symptoms, 
and  wrote  to  Rome  advising  the  Pope  to  be  cautious  how  he  dealt  with 
Luther.  His  advice  was  thrown  away.  When,  after  wearying  delays,  the 
monk  had  his  first  interview  with  the  Cardinal-Legate,  he  was  told  that 
no  discussion  could  be  permitted,  private  or  public,  until  Luther  had 
recanted  his  heresies,  had  promised  not  to  repeat  them,  and  had  given 
assurance  that  he  would  not  trouble  the  peace  of  the  Church  in  the  future. 
Being  pressed  to  name  the  heresies,  the  adroit  theologian  named  two 
opinions  which  had  wide-reaching  consequences  —  the  58th  conclusion 
of  the  Theses  and  the  statement  in  the  Resolutiones  that  the  sacraments 
were  not  efftcacious  apart  from  faith  in  the  recipient.  There  was  some 
discussion  notwithstanding  the  Cardinal's  declaration  ;  but  in  the  end 
Luther  was  ordered  to  recant  or  depart.  He  departed  ;  and,  after  an 
appeal  from  the  Pope  ill-informed  to  the  Pope  to  be  well-informed,  and 
also  an  appeal  to  a  General  Council,  he  returned  to  Wittenberg.  There 
he  wrote  out  an  account  of  his  interview  with  the  Legate  —  the  Acta 
Augustana  —  which  was  published  and  read  all  over  Germany. 

The  interview  between  the  Cardinal-Legate  and  Luther  at  Augsburg' 
almost  dates  the  union  between  the  new  religious  movement,  the 
growing  national  restlessness  under  Roman  domination,  and  the 
humanist  intellectual  revolt.  A  well-known  and  pious  monk,  an 
esteemed  teacher  in  a  University  which  he  was  making  famous 
throughout  Germany,  an  earnest  moralist  who  had  proposed  to  discuss 
the  efficacy  of  a  system  of  Indulgences  which  manifestly  had  some 
detrimental  sides,  had  been  told,  in  the  most  peremptory  way,  that  he 
must  recant,  and  that  without  explanation  or  discussion.  German 
patriots  saw  in  the  proceeding  another  instance  of  the  contemptuous 
way  in  which  Rome  always  treated  Germany  ;  humanists  believed  it 
to  be  tyrannical  stifling  of  the  truth  even  worse  than  the  dealings  with 
Reuchlin  ;  and  both  humanist  and  patriot  believed  it  to  be  another 


134  Mission  of  Miltitz  to  Germany  [i5i8-9 

instance  of  the  Roman  greed  for  German  gold.  As  for  Luther 
himself  he  daily  expected  a  Bull  from  Rome  excommunicating  him 
as  a  heretic. 

But  the  political  condition  of  affairs  in  Germany  was  too  delicate  — 
the  country  was  on  the  eve  of  the  choice  of  a  King  of  the  Romans,  and 
possibly  of  an  imperial  election  —  and  the  support  of  the  Elector  of 
Saxony  too  important,  for  the  Pope  to  proceed  rashly  in  the  con- 
demnation of  Luther  which  had  been  pronounced  by  his  Legate  at 
Augsburg.  It  was  resolved  to  send  a  special  delegate  to  Germany 
to  report  upon  the  condition  of  affairs  there.  Care  was  taken  to 
select  a  man  who  would  be  acceptable  to  the  Elector.  Charles  von 
Miltitz  belonged  to  a  noble  Saxon  family  ;  he  was  one  of  the  Pope's 
chamberlains,  and  for  some  years  had  been  the  Elector's  agent  at 
Rome.  His  Holiness  did  more  to  gain  over  Luther's  protector. 
Frederick  had  long  wished  for  that  mark  of  the  Pope's  friendship,  the 
Golden  Rose,  and  had  privately  asked  for  it  through  Miltitz  himself. 
The  Golden  Rose  was  now  sent  to  him  with  a  gracious  letter. 
Miltitz  was  also  furnished  with  formal  papal  letters  to  the  Elector, 
to  his  councillors,  to  the  magistrates  of  Wittenberg,  and  to  several 
others  —  letters  in  which  Luther  figured  as  "  a  child  of  Satan."  The 
phrase  was  probably  forgotten  when  Leo  wrote  to  Luther  some  time 
later  and  addressed  him  as  his  dear  son. 

Miltitz  had  no  sooner  reached  Germany  than  he  saw  that  the 
state  of  affairs  there  was  utterly  unknown  to  the  Roman  Curia.  It 
was  not  a  man  that  had  to  be  dealt  with,  but  the  slowly  increasing 
movement  of  a  nation.  He  felt  this  during  the  progress  of  his  journey. 
When  he  reached  Augsburg  and  Niirnberg,  and  found  himself  among 
his  old  friends  and  kinsmen,  three  out  of  five  were  strongly  in  favour 
of  Luther.  So  impressed  was  he  with  the  state  of  feeling  in  the  country 
that  before  he  entered  Saxony  he  "put  the  Golden  Rose  in  a  sack  with 
the  Indulgences,"  to  use  the  words  of  his  friend,  the  jurist  Scheurl,  laid 
aside  all  indications  of  the  papal  Commissioner,  and  travelled  like  a 
private  nobleman.  Tetzel  was  summoned  to  meet  him,  but  the  unhappy 
man  declared  that  his  life  was  not  safe  if  he  left  his  convent.  Miltitz 
felt  that  it  would  be  better  to  have  private  interviews  before  producing 
his  official  credentials.  He  had  one  with  Luther,  where  he  set  himself 
to  discover  how  much  Luther  would  really  yield,  and  found  that  the 
Reformer  was  not  the  obstinate  man  he  had  been  led  to  suppose. 
Luther  was  prepared  to  yield  much.  He  would  write  a  submissive 
letter  to  the  Pope  ;  he  would  publish  an  advice  to  the  people  to 
honour  the  Roman  Church  ;  and  he  would  say  that  Indulgences  were 
useful  in  remitting  canonical  Satisfactions.  All  of  which  Luther  did. 
But  the  Roman  Curia  did  not  support  Miltitz,  and  the  Commissioner 
had  to  reckon  with  John  Eck  of  Ingolstadt,  who  wished  to  silence 
his  old  friend  by  scholastic  dialectic  and  procure  his  condemnation 


1519]  Disputation  ivith  Eck  at  Leipzig  135 

as  a  heretic.  Nor  was  Luther  quite  convinced  of  Miltitz'  honesty. 
When  the  Commissioner  dismissed  him  with  a  kiss,  he  could  not  help 
asking  himself,  he  tells  us,  whether  it  was  a  Judas-kiss.  He  had 
been  re-examining  his  convictions  about  the  faith  which  justifies,  and 
trying  to  see  their  consequences  ;  and  he  had  been  studying  the  Papal 
Decretals,  and  discovering  to  his  amazement  and  indignation  the  frauds 
that  many  of  them  contained  and  the  slender  foundation  which  they 
really  gave  for  the  pretensions  of  the  Papacy.  He  had  been  driven 
to  these  studies.  The  papal  theologians  had  confronted  him  with 
the  absolute  authority  of  the  Pope.  Luther  was  forced  to  investigate 
the  evidence  for  this  authority.  His  conclusion  was  that  the  papal 
supremacy  had  been  forced  on  Germany  on  the  strength  of  a  collection 
of  decretals ;  and  that  many  of  these  decretals  would  not  bear  in- 
vestigation. It  is  hard  to  say,  judging  from  his  correspondence, 
whether  this  discovery  brought  joy  or  sorrow  to  Luther.  He  had 
accepted  the  Pope's  supremacy ;  it  was  one  of  the  strongest  of  his 
inherited  beliefs,  and  now  under  the  combined  influence  of  historical 
study,  of  the  opinions  of  the  early  Fathers,  and  of  Scripture,  it  was 
slowly  dissolving.  He  hardly  knew  where  he  stood.  He  was  half- 
terrified,  half-exultant,  at  the  results  of  his  studies,  and  the  ebb  and 
flow  of  his  own  feelings  were  answered  by  the  anxieties  of  his  imme- 
diate circle  of  friends.  A  public  disputation  might  clear  the  air,  and 
he  almost  feverishly  welcomed  Eck's  challenge  to  dispute  publicly  with 
him  at  Leipzig  on  the  primacy  and  supremacy  of  the  Pope. 

Contemporary  witnesses  describe  the  common  country  carts  which 
conveyed  the  Wittenberg  theologians  to  the  capital  of  Ducal  Saxony, 
the  two  hundred  students  with  their  halberts  and  helmets  who  escorted 
their  honoured  professors  into  wdiat  was  an  enemy's  country,  the 
crowded  inns  and  lodging-houses  where  the  master  of  the  house  kept 
a  man  with  a  halbert  standing  beside  every  table  to  prevent  disputes 
becoming  bloody  quarrels,  the  densely  packed  hall  in  Duke  George's 
palace,  the  citizens'  guard,  the  platform  with  its  two  chairs  for  the 
disputants  and  seats  for  academic  and  secular  dignitaries,  and  the  two 
theologians,  both  sons  of  peasants,  met  to  protect  the  old  or  to  cleave 
a  way  for  the  new.  Eck's  intention  was  to  force  Luther  to  make  such 
a  declaration  as  would  justify  him  in  denouncing  his  opponent  as  a 
partisan  of  the  Bohemian  heresy.  The  audience  swayed  with  a  wave 
of  excitement,  and  Duke  George  placed  his  arms  akimbo,  wagged  his 
long  beard,  and  said  aloud,  '•  God  help  us  !  the  plague  !  "  when  Luther 
was  forced,  in  spite  of  protestations,  to  acknowledge  that  not  all  the 
opinions  of  Wiclif  and  Hus  were  wrong. 

So  far  as  the  fight  in  dialectic  had  gone  Eck  was  victorious ;  he 
had  compelled  Luther,  as  he  thought,  to  declare  himself,  and  there 
remained  only  the  Bull  of  Excommunication,  and  to  rid  Germany  of 
a  pestilent  heretic.     He  was  triumphant.     Luther  was  correspondingly 


136  Luther's  ivritings  [l520 

downcast  and  returned  to  Wittenberg  full  of  melancholy  forebodings. 
But  some  victories  are  worse  than  defeats.  Eck  had  done  what  the 
more  politic  Miltitz  had  wished  to  avoid.  He  had  made  Luther  a 
central  figure  round  w^hich  all  the  smouldering  discontent  of  Germany 
with  Rome  could  rally,  and  had  made  it  possible  for  the  political  move- 
ment to  become  impregnated  with  the  passion  of  religious  conviction. 
The  Leipzig  Disputation  was  jDcrhaps  the  most  important  episode  in 
the  whole  course  of  Luther's  career.  It  made  him  see  clearly  for 
the  first  time  what  lay  in  his  opposition  to  Indulgences  ;  and  it  made 
others  see  it  also.  It  was  after  Leipzig  that  the  younger  German 
humanists  rallied  round  Luther  to  a  man  ;  the  burghers  saw  that 
religion  and  liberty  were  not  opposing  but  allied  forces  ;  that  there 
was  room  for  a  common  effort  to  create  a  Germany  for  the  Germans. 
The  feeling  awakened  gave  new  life  to  Luther ;  sermons,  pamphlets, 
controversial  writings  from  his  tireless  pen  flooded  the  land  and  were 
read  eagerly  by  all  classes  of  the  population. 

Three  of  these  writings  stand  forth  pre-eminently  :  The  Liberty 
of  a  Christian  Man;  To  the  Christian  Nohility  of  the  Crerman  Nation 
concerning  the  reformation  of  the  Christian  Commonwealth ;  and  On  the 
Babylonish  Captivity  of  the  Church.  They  were  all  written  during  the 
year  1520,  after  three  years  spent  in  controversy,  and  at  a  time  when 
Luther  felt  that  he  had  completely  broken  with  Rome.  They  are 
known  in  Germany  as  the  three  great  Reformation  treatises.  The 
tract  on  Christian  liberty  was  probably  the  last  published  (October, 
1520),  but  it  contains  the  principles  which  underlie  the  two  others. 
It  is  a  brief  statement,  free  from  all  theological  subtleties,  of  the 
priesthood  of  all  believers,  which  is  a  consequence  of  the  fact  of 
justification  by  faith  alone.  The  first  part  shows  that  everything 
which  a  Christian  has  can  be  traced  back  to  his  faith ;  if  he  has  faith, 
he  has  all :  if  he  has  not  faith,  he  has  nothing.  The  second  part 
shows  that  everything  which  a  Christian  man  does  must  come  from 
his  faith ;  it  is  necessary  to  use  all  the  ceremonies  of  divine  service 
which  have  been  found  helpful  for  spiritual  education;  perhaps  to 
fast  and  practise  mortifications ;  but  these  are  not  good  things  in  the 
sense  that  they  make  a  man  good;  they  are  all  signs  of  faith  and 
are  to  be  practised  with  joy,  because  they  are  done  to  the  God  to 
Whom  faith  unites  man. 

Luther  applied  those  principles  to  the  reformation  of  the  Christian 
Church  in  his  book  on  its  "Babylonish  Captivity."  The  elaborate 
sacramental  system  of  the  Roman  Church  is  subjected  to  a  searching 
criticism,  in  which  Luther  shows  that  the  Roman  Curia  has  held  the 
Church  of  God  in  bondage  to  human  traditions  which  run  counter 
to  plain  messages  and  promises  in  the  Word  of  God.  He  declares 
himself  in  favour  of  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  and  asserts  that  divorce 
is  in  some  cases  lawful. 


1520]  Appeal  To  the  Christian  Nobility  137 

The  Appeal  To  the  Christian  Nobility  of  the  G-erman  Nation  made 
the  greatest  immediate  impression.  Contemporaries  called  it  a  trumpet 
blast.  It  was  a  call  to  all  Germany  to  unite  against  Rome.  It  was 
written  in  haste,  but  must  have  been  long  meditated  upon.  Luther 
wrote  the  introduction  on  the  23rd  of  June  (1520);  the  printers 
worked  as  he  wrote  ;  it  was  finished  and  published  about  the  middle  of 
August,  and  by  the  18th  of  the  month  4000  copies  had  gone  into  all 
parts  of  Germany  and  the  printers  could  not  supply  the  demand.  This 
Appeal  was  the  manifesto  of  a  revolution  sent  forth  by  a  true  leader 
of  men,  able  to  concentrate  the  attack  and  direct  it  to  the  enemy's 
one  vital  spot.  It  grasped  the  whole  situation ;  it  summed  up  with 
vigour  and  directness  all  the  grievances  which  had  hitherto  been  stated 
separately  and  weakly;  it  embodied  every  proposal  of  reform,  however 
incomplete,  and  set  it  in  its  proper  place  in  one  combined  scheme. 
All  the  parts  were  welded  together  by  a  simple  and  direct  religious 
faith,  and  made  living  by  the  moral  earnestness  which  pervaded  the 
whole. 

Reform  had  been  impossible,  the  appeal  says,  because  the  walls 
behind  which  Rome  lay  entrenched  had  been  left  standing  —  walls  of 
straw  and  paper,  but  in  appearance  formidable  fortifications.  If  the 
temporal  Powers  demanded  reforms,  they  were  told  that  the  Spiritual 
Power  was  superior  and  controlling.  If  the  Spiritual  Power  itself  was 
attacked  from  the  side  of  Scripture,  it  was  affirmed  that  no  one  could 
say  what  Scripture  really  meant  but  the  Pope.  If  a  Council  was  called 
for  to  make  the  reform,  men  were  informed  that  it  was  impossible  to 
summon  a  Council  without  the  leave  of  the  Pope.  Now  this  pretended 
Spiritual  Power  which  made  reform  impossible  was  a  delusion.  The 
only  real  spiritual  power  existing  belonged  to  the  whole  body  of 
believers  in  virtue  of  the  spiritual  priesthood  bestowed  upon  them  by 
Christ  Himself.  The  clergy  were  distinguished  from  the  laity,  not  by 
an  indelible  character  imposed  upon  them  in  a  divine  mystery  called 
ordination,  but  because  they  were  set  in  the  commonwealth  to  do  a 
particular  work.  If  they  neglected  the  work  they  were  there  to  do, 
the  clergy  were  accountable  to  the  same  temporal  Powers  which  ruled 
the  land.  The  statement  that  the  Pope  alone  can  interpret  Scripture 
is  a  foolish  one  ;  the  Holy  Scripture  is  open  to  all,  and  can  be  inter- 
preted by  all  true  believers  who  have  the  mind  of  Christ  and  come  to 
the  Word  of  God  humbly  and  really  seeking  enlightenment.  When 
a  Council  is  needed,  every  individual  Christian  has  a  right  to  do  his 
best  to  get  it  summoned,  and  the  temporal  Powers  are  there  to  repre- 
sent and  enforce  his  wishes. 

The  straw  walls  having  been  cleared  away,  the  Appeal  proceeds 
with  an  indictment  against  Rome.  There  is  in  Rome  one  who  calls 
himself  the  Vicar  of  Christ  and  whose  life  has  small  resemblance  to 
that  of  our  Lord  and  St    Peter;    for  this  man  wears  a  triple  crown 


138  Attack  upon  the  Roman  Church  [1520 

(a  single  one  does  not  content  him),  and  keeps  up  such  a  state  that  he 
requires  a  hirger  personal  revenue  than  the  Emperor.  He  has  surrounding 
him  a  number  of  men  called  Cardinals,  whose  only  apparent  use  is  to 
draw  to  themselves  the  revenues  of  the  richest  convents  and  benefices 
and  to  spend  this  money  in  keeping  up  the  state  of  a  wealthy  monarch  in 
Rome.  In  this  way,  and  through  other  holders  of  German  benefices 
who  live  as  hangers-on  at  the  papal  court,  Rome  takes  from  Germany 
a  sum  of  300,000  gulden  annually,  —  more  than  is  paid  to  the  Emperor. 
Rome  robs  Germany  in  many  other  ways,  most  of  them  fraudulent  — 
annates,  absolution  money,  &c.  The  chicanery  used  to  get  possession 
of  German  benefices;  the  exactions  on  the  bestowal  of  the  pallium; 
the  trafficking  in  exemptions  and  permissions  to  evade  laws  ecclesiasti- 
cal and  moral,  are  all  trenchantly  described.  The  plan  of  reform 
sketched  includes  the  complete  abolition  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope 
over  the  State;  the  creation  of  a  national  German  Church  with  an 
ecclesiastical  national  Council,  to  be  the  final  court  of  appeal  for  Ger- 
many and  to  represent  the  German  Church  as  the  Diet  did  the  German 
State ;  some  internal  religious  reforms,  such  as  the  limitation  of  the 
number  of  pilgrimages,  which  are  destroying  morality  and  creating  in 
men  a  distaste  for  honest  work  ;  reductions  in  the  mendicant  Orders, 
which  are  mere  incentives  to  a  life  of  beggary;  the  inspection  of  all 
convents  and  nunneries  and  permission  given  to  those  who  are  dissatis- 
fied with  their  monastic  lives  to  return  to  the  world ;  the  limitation  of 
ecclesiastical  festivals  which  are  too  often  nothing  but  scenes  of  glut- 
tony, drunkenness,  and  debauchery ;  a  married  priesthood  and  an  end 
put  to  the  universal  and  degrading  concubinage  of  the  German  parish 
priests.  The  Appeal  closes  with  some  solemn  words  addressed  to  the 
luxury  and  licensed  immorality  of  the  cities. 

None  of  Luther's  writings  produced  such  an  instantaneous,  wide- 
spread, and  powerful  effect  as  did  this  Appeal.  It  went  circulating  all 
over  Germany,  uniting  all  classes  of  society  in  a  way  hitherto  unknown. 
It  was  an  effectual  antidote,  so  far  as  the  majority  of  the  German  people 
was  concerned,  to  the  Bull  of  Excommunication  which  had  been  prepared 
in  Rome  by  Cajetan,  Prierias,  and  Eck,  and  had  been  published  there  in 
June,  1520.  Eck  was  entrusted  with  the  publication  of  the  Bull  in 
Germany,  where  it  did  not  command  much  respect.  It  had  been  drafted 
by  men  who  had  been  Luther's  opponents,  and  suggested  the  gratification 
of  private  animosity  rather  than  calm  judicial  examination  and  rejection 
of  heretical  opinion.  The  feeling  grew  stronger  when  it  was  discovered 
that  Eck,  having  received  the  power  to  do  so,  had  inserted  the  names  of 
Adelmann,  Pirkheimer,  Spengler,  and  Carlstadt  along  with  that  of 
Luther  —  all  five  personal  enemies.  The  German  Bishops  seemed  to  be 
unwilling  to  allow  the  publication  of  the  Bull  within  their  districts. 
Later  the  publication  became  dangerous,  so  threatening  was  the  attitude 
of  the  crowds.       Luther,  on  his  part,  burnt  the    Bull  publicly;    and 


1520]  Bull  of  Excommunication  139 

electrified  Germany  by  the  deed.  Rome  had  now  done  its  utmost  to  get 
rid  of  Luther  by  way  of  ecclesiastical  repression.  If  he  was  to  be  over- 
thrown, if  the  new  religious  movement  and  the  national  uprising  which 
enclosed  it,  were  to  be  stifled,  this  could  only  be  done  by  the  aid  of  the 
highest  secular  power.     The  Roman  Curia  turned  to  the  Emperor. 

Maximilian  had  died  suddenly  on  the  12th  of  January,  1519.  After 
some  months  of  intriguing,  the  papal  diplomacy  being  very  tortuous, 
his  grandson,  Charles  V,  the  young  King  of  Spain,  was  unanimously 
chosen  to  be  his  successor  (June  28).  Troubles  in  Spain  prevented 
him  from  leaving  that  country  at  once  to  take  possession  of  his  new 
dignities.  He  was  crowned  at  Aachen  on  the  23rd  of  October,  1520, 
and  opened  his  first  German  Diet  on  January  22,  1521. 

The  proceedings  of  this  Diet  were  of  great  importance  apart  from  its 
relation  to  Luther  ;  but  to  the  common  people  of  Germany,  to  the  papal 
Nuncios,  Aleander  and  Caraccioli,  and  to  the  foreign  envoys,  the  issues 
raised  by  Luther's  revolt  against  Rome  were  the  matters  of  absorbing 
interest.  Girolamo  Aleander  had  been  specially  selected  by  Pope  Leo  X 
to  secure  Luther's  condemnation  by  the  Emperor.  He  was  a  cultivated 
Churchman,  who  knew  Germany  well,  and  had  been  in  intimate  relations 
with  many  of  the  German  humanists.  His  despatches  and  those  of  the 
envoys  of  England,  Spain,  and  Venice  witness  to  the  extraordinary 
excitement  among  the  people  of  all  classes.  Aleander  had  been  in 
Germany  ten  years  earlier,  and  had  found  no  people  so  devoted  to  the 
Papacy  as  the  Germans,  Now  all  things  were  changed.  The  legion 
of  poor  nobles,  the  German  lawyers  and  canonists,  the  professors  and 
students,  the  men  of  learning  and  the  poets,  were  all  on  Luther's  side. 
Most  of  the  monks,  a  large  portion  of  the  clergy,  many  of  the  Bisho^Ds, 
supported  Luther.  His  friends  had  the  audacity  to  establish  a  printing- 
press  in  Worms,  whence  issued  quantities  of  the  forbidden  writings, 
which  were  hawked  about  in  the  market-place,  on  the  streets,  and  even 
within  the  Emperor's  palace.  These  books  were  eagerly  bought  and 
read  with  avidity  ;  large  prices  were  sometimes  given  for  them. 

Aleander  could  not  induce  the  Emperor  to  consent  to  Luther's 
immediate  condemnation.  Charles  must  have  felt  the  difficulties  of  the 
situation.  His  position  as  head  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  the 
traditional  policy  of  the  Habsburg  family,  his  own  deeply  rooted 
personal  convictions,  which  found  outcome  in  the  brief  statement  read 
to  the  Princes  on  the  day  after  Luther's  appearance,  all  go  to  prove  that 
he  had  not  the  slightest  sympathy  with  the  Reformer  and  that  he  had 
resolved  that  he  should  be  condemned.  But  the  Diet's  consent  was 
necessary  before  the  imperial  ban  could  be  issued;  and  besides  Charles 
had  his  own  bargain  to  make  with  the  Pope,  and  this  matter  of  Luther 
might  help  him  to  make  a  good  one.  The  Diet  resolved  that  Luther 
should  be  heard;  a  safe-conduct  was  sent  along  with  the  summons  to 
attend;   Luther  travelled  to  Worms  in  what  seemed  like  a  triumphal 


140  Luther  at  the  Diet  of  Worms  [1521 

procession  to  the  angry  partisans  of  the  Pope ;  and  on  April  16th  he 
appeared  before  Charles  and  the  Diet.  He  entered  smiling,  says 
Aleander  ;  he  looked  slowly  round  the  assembly  and  his  face  became 
grave.  On  a  table  near  where  he  was  placed  there  was  a  pile  of  books. 
Twenty-five  of  Luther's  writings  had  been  hastily  collected  by  command 
of  the  Emperor  and  placed  there.  The  procedure  was  entrusted  to 
John  Eck,  the  Official  of  Trier  (to  be  distinguished  from  John  Eck 
of  Ingolstadt),  a  man  in  whom  Aleander  had  much  confidence  and  who 
was  lodged,  he  says  significantly,  in  the  chamber  next  his.  Luther  was 
asked  whether  the  books  before  him  were  of  his  authorship  (the  names 
were  read  over  to  him),  and  whether  he  would  retract  what  he  had 
written  in  them.  He  answered,  acknowledging  the  books,  but  asked  for 
time  to  consider  how  to  reply  to  the  second  question.  He  was  granted 
delay  till  the  following  day;  and  retired  to  his  lodging. 

The  evening  and  the  night  were  a  time  of  terrible  depression,  conflict, 
despair,  and  prayer.  Before  the  dawn  came,  the  victory  had  been  won 
and  he  felt  in  a  great  calm.  He  was  sent  for  in  the  evening  (April  18) ; 
the  streets  were  so  thronged  that  his  conductors  had  to  take  him  by 
obscure  passages  to  the  Diet.  There  was  the  same  table  with  the  same 
pile  of  books.  This  time  Luther  Avas  ready  with  his  answer,  and  his 
voice  had  recovered  its  clear  musical  note.  When  asked  whether, 
having  acknowledged  the  books  to  be  his,  he  was  prepared  to  defend 
them  or  to  withdraw  them,  he  replied  at  some  length.  In  substance, 
it  was,  that  his  books  were  not  all  of  the  same  kind;  in  some  he  had 
written  on  faith  and  morals  in  a  way  approved  by  all,  and  that  it  was 
needless  to  retract  what  friends  and  foes  alike  approved  of;  others  were 
written  against  the  Papacy,  a  system  which  by  teaching  and  example 
was  ruining  Christendom,  and  that  he  could  not  retract  these  writings; 
as  for  the  rest,  he  was  prepared  to  admit  that  he  might  have  been  more 
violent  in  his  charges  than  became  a  Christian,  but  still  he  was  not 
prepared  to  retract  them  either  ;  but  he  was  ready  to  listen  to  anyone 
who  could  show  that  he  had  erred.  The  speech  was  repeated  in  Latin 
for  the  benefit  of  the  Emperor.  Then  Charles  told  him  through  Eck  that 
he  was  not  there  to  question  matters  which  had  been  long  ago  decided  and 
settled  by  General  Councils,  and  that  he  must  answer  plainly  whether 
he  meant  to  retract  what  he  had  said  contradicting  the  decisions  of  the 
Council  of  Constance.  Luther  answered  that  he  must  be  convinced  by 
Holy  Scripture,  for  he  knew  that  both  Pope  and  Councils  had  erred ;  his 
conscience  was  fast  bound  to  Holy  Scripture,  and  it  was  neither  safe  nor 
honest  to  act  against  conscience.  This  was  said  in  German  and  in 
Latin.  The  Emperor  asked  him,  through  Eck,  whether  he  actually 
believed  that  a  General  Council  could  err.  Luther  replied  that  he  did, 
and  could  prove  it.  Eck  was  about  to  begin  a  discussion,  but  Charles 
interposed.  His  interest  was  evidently  confined  to  the  one  point  of  a 
General  Council.     Luther  was  dismissed,  the  crowd  followed  him,  and  a 


io2i]  Condemnation  of  Luthey'  141 

number  of  the  followers  of  the  Elector  of  Saxony  accompanied  him. 
Aleander  tells  us  that  as  he  left  the  audience  hall  he  raised  his  hand  in 
the  fashion  of  the  German  soldier  who  had  struck  a  good  stroke.  He 
had  struck  his  stroke,  and  left  the  hall. 

Next  day  Charles  met  the  princes,  and  read  them  a  paper  in  which 
he  had  written  his  own  opinion  of  what  ought  to  be  done.  The  Ger- 
mans pleaded  for  delay  and  negotiations  with  Luther.  This  was  agreed 
to,  and  meetings  were  held  in  hopes  of  arriving  at  a  conference. 
A  commission  of  eight,  representing  the  Electors,  the  nobles,  and  the 
cities,  was  appointed  to  meet  with  Luther.  They  were  all  sincerely 
anxious  to  arrive  at  a  working  compromise  ;  but  the  negotiations  were 
in  vain.  The  Emperor's  assertion  of  the  infallibility  of  a  General 
Council,  and  Luther's  phrase,  a  conscience  fast  bound  to  the  Holy 
Scripture,  could  not  be  welded  together  by  any  diplomacy  however 
sincere.  The  Word  of  God  was  to  Luther  a  living  voice  speaking  to 
his  own  soul,  it  was  not  to  be  stifled  by  the  decisions  of  any  Council  ; 
Luther  was  ready  to  lay  down  his  life,  rather  than  accept  any  com- 
promise which  endangered  the  Christian  liberty  which  came  to  men  by 
justifying  faith. 

The  negotiations  having  failed,  the  Ban  of  the  Empire  was  pro- 
nounced against  Luther.  It  was  dated  on  the  day  on  which  Charles 
concluded  his  secret  treaty  with  Pope  Leo  X,  as  if  to  make  clear  to  the 
Pope  the  price  which  he  paid  for  the  condemnation  of  the  Reformer. 
Luther  was  ordered  to  quit  Worms  on  April  26th,  and  his  safe-conduct 
protected  him  for  twenty  days,  and  no  longer.  At  their  expiration  he 
was  liable  to  be  seized  and  destroyed  as  a  pestilent  heretic.  On  his 
journey  homewards  he  was  captured  by  a  band  of  soldiers  and  taken 
to  the  Castle  of  the  Wartburg  by  order  of  the  Elector  of  Saxony. 
This  was  his  "  Patmos,"  where  he  was  to  be  kept  in  safety  until  the 
troubles  were  over.  His  disappearance  did  not  mean  that  he  was  no 
longer  a  great  leader  of  men  ;  but  it  marks  the  time  when  the  Lutheran 
revolt  merges  into  national  opposition  to  Rome. 


CHAPTER   V 

NATIONAL  OPPOSITION  TO  ROME  IN  GERMANY 

Thkough  all  the  political  and  religious  confusion,  which  distracted 
Germany  during  the  period  from  the  Diet  of  Worms  to  the  Peasants' 
War,  there  runs  one  thread  which  gives  to  the  story  at  least  a  semblance 
of  unity  ;  and  that  is  the  attempt  and  failure  of  a  central  government  to 
keep  the  nation  together  on  the  path  towards  a  practical  reform  in 
Church  and  in  State.  The  reform  was  no  less  imperative  than  the 
obstacles  to  it  were  formidable.  Germany  was  little  more  than  a 
geographical  expression,  and  a  vague  one  withal  ;  it  was  not  a  State, 
it  could  hardly  be  called  a  nation,  so  deep  were  its  class  divisions. 
Horizontal  as  well  as  vertical  lines  traversed  it  in  every  part,  and 
its  social  strata  were  no  more  fused  into  one  nation  than  its  political 
sections  were  Avelded  into  one  organised  State.  Rival  ambitions  and 
conflicting  interests  might  set  Prince  against  Prince,  knight  against 
knight,  and  town  against  town,  but  deeper  antagonisms  ranged  knights 
against  Princes  and  cities,  or  cities  against  Princes  and  knights  ;  they 
might  all  conspire  against  Caesar,  or  the  peasant  might  rise  up  against 
them.  Imperial  authority  was  an  ineffective  shadow  brooding  over  the 
troubled  waters  and  unable  to  still  the  storm.  Separatism  in  every 
variety  of  permutation  and  combination  was  erected  into  a  principle, 
and  on  it  was  based  the  Germanic  political  system. 

Yet  this  warring  concourse  of  atoms  felt  once  and  again  a  common 
impulse,  and  adopted  on  rare  occasions  a  common  line  of  action.  With 
few  exceptions  the  German  people  were  bent  on  reform  of  the  Church, 
and  with  one  voice  they  welcomed  the  election  of  Charles  V.  Nor  for 
the  moment  was  the  hope  of  political  salvation  entirely  quenched.  The 
efforts  of  Berthold  of  Mainz  and  Frederick  of  Saxony  to  evolve  order  out 
of  the  chaos  had  been  foiled  by  the  skill  of  the  Emperor  Maximilian, 
and  the  advent  of  Luther  had  been  the  signal  for  a  fresh  eruption  of 
discord.  But  the  urgency  of  the  need  produced  a  correspondingly 
strong  demand  for  national  unity  ;  and  at  his  election  Charles  was 
pledged  to  renew  the  attempt  to  create  a  national  government,  to 
maintain  a  national  judicature,  and  to  pursue  a  national  policy.     Un- 

142 


Dynastic  aims  of  Charles  143 

happily  vague  aspirations  and  imperial  promises  were  poor  substitutes  for 
political  forces,  and  the  forms  in  which  the  common  feelings  of  the 
nation  found  vent  added  strength  to  centrifugal  tendencies,  and  con- 
tributed their  share  to  the  ruin  of  unity.  The  attempt  to  remodel  the 
Church  divided  the  realm  into  two  persistently  hostile  camps,  and  the 
succession  of  Charles  V  secured  the  throne  of  the  Caesars  to  a  family 
which  was  too  often  ready  to  sacrifice  its  national  imperial  duties  to 
the  claims  of  dynastic  ambition. 

Seldom  has  a  nation  had  better  cause  to  repent  a  fit  of  enthusiasm 
than  Germany  had  when  it  realised  the  effects  of  the  election  of 
Charles  V.  Of  his  rivals  Francis  I  would  no  doubt  have  made  a  worse 
Emperor,  but  the  choice  of  Ferdinand  —  a  suggestion  made  by  Margaret 
of  Savoy  and  peremptorily  rejected  by  Charles  himself  —  or  of  Frederick 
of  Saxony,  would  probably  have  been  attended  with  less  disastrous 
consequences  to  the  German  national  cause.  In  personal  tastes  and 
sympathies,  in  the  aims  he  pursued  within  his  German  kingdom,  and 
in  his  foreign  policy  Charles  V  was  an  alien ;  his  ways  were  not  those 
of  his  subjects,  nor  were  his  thoughts  their  thoughts ;  he  could  neither 
speak  the  German  language,  nor  read  the  German  mind.  Nurtured 
from  birth  in  the  Burgundian  lands  of  his  father,  he  at  first  regarded 
the  world  from  a  purely  Burgundian  point  of  view  and  sorely  offended 
his  Spanish  subjects  by  his  neglect  of  their  interests  in  concluding 
the  Treaty  of  Noyon  (1516).  But  the  Flemish  aspect  of  his  Court  and 
his  policy  rapidly  changed  under  southern  influence,  and  the  ten  years  of 
his  youth  (1517-20  and  1522-9)  which  he  spent  in  Spain  developed  the 
Spanish  tastes  and  feelings  which  he  derived  from  his  mother  Juana. 
His  mind  grew  ever  more  Spanish  in  sympathy,  and  this  mental  evolution 
was  more  and  more  clearly  reflected  in  Charles'  dynastic  policy.  So  far 
as  it  was  affected  by  national  considerations,  those  considerations  became 
ever  more  Spanish ;  the  Colossus  which  bestrode  the  world  gradually 
turned  its  face  southwards,  and  it  was  to  Spain  and  not  to  the  land 
of  his  birth  that  Charles  retired  to  die. 

From  this  development  Germany  could  not  fail  to  suffer.  German 
soldiers  helped  to  win  Pavia  and  to  desecrate  Rome,  but  their  blood  was 
shed  in  vain  so  far  as  the  fatherland  was  concerned.  Charles'  conquests 
in  Italy,  made  in  the  name  of  the  German  Empire  and  supported  by 
German  imperial  claims,  went  to  swell  the  growing  bulk  of  the  Spanish 
monarchy,  and  when  he  was  crowned  by  Pope  Clement  VII  at  Bologna 
it  was  noted  that  functions  which  belonged  of  right  to  Princes  of  the 
Empire  were  performed  by  Spanish  Grandees.  His  promise  to  the 
German  nation  to  restore  to  the  Empire  its  pristine  extent  and  glory 
was  interpreted  in  practice  as  an  undertaking  to  enhance  at  all  costs  the 
prestige  of  the  Habsburg  family.  The  loss  of  its  theoretical  rights  over 
such  States  as  Milan  and  Genoa  was,  however,  rather  a  sentimental 
than  a  real  grievance  to  the  nation.     It  had  better  cause  for  complaint 


144  Charles  and  the  Papacy 

when  Charles  (1543)  in  effect  severed  the  Netherlands  from  the  Empire 
and  transferred  them  to  Spain.  He  sacrificed  German  interests  in 
Holstein  to  those  of  his  brother-in-law  Christian  II  of  Denmark  ;  and, 
although  he  was  not  primarily  responsible  for  the  loss  of  Metz,  Toul, 
and  Verdun  in  1552,  his  neglect  of  German  interests  along  the  Slavonic 
coasts  of  the  Baltic  was  not  without  effect  upon  the  eventual  incor- 
poration of  Esthonia,  Livonia,  and  Courland,  in  the  Russian  domains  of 
the  Czar.  German  troops  had  been  wont  to  march  on  Rome;  but 
Charles  brought  Italian  troops  to  the  banks  of  the  Elbe.  He  introduced 
into  Germany  that  Spanish  taint  which  was  only  washed  out  in  the 
Thirty  Years'  War ;  and  he  then  sought  to  turn  that  tide  of  northern 
influence,  which  has  been  flowing  ever  since  the  decline  of  the  Roman 
Empire. 

In  religion  as  well  as  in  politics  Charles'  increasingly  Spanish  ten- 
dencies had  an  evil  effect  on  the  Empire.  He  was  no  theologian,  and 
he  could  never  comprehend  the  Reformers'  objections  to  Roman  dogma ; 
but  that  did  not  make  him  less  hostile  to  their  cause.  His  attitude 
towards  religion  was  half  way  between  the  genial  orthodoxy  of  his 
grandfather  Maximilian  and  the  gloomy  fanaticism  of  his  son  Philip  II, 
but  his  mind  was  always  travelling  away  from  the  former  and  towards 
the  latter  position  ;  and  the  transition  enhanced  the  difficulty  of  coming 
to  an  accommodation  with  Lutheran  heretics. 

This  orthodoxy,  however,  implied  no  blindness  to  the  abuses  of  the 
Pope's  temporal  power,  and  was  always  conditioned  by  regard  for  the 
Emperor's  material  interests.  The  fervid  declaration  of  zeal  against 
Luther  which  Charles  read  at  the  Diet  of  Worms  has  been  described 
as  the  most  genuine  expression  of  his  religious  feelings.  No  doubt  it 
was  sincere,  but  it  is  well  to  note  that  the  Emperor's  main  desire  was 
then  to  wean  Leo  X  from  his  alliance  with  Francis  I,  and  to  prove  to 
the  papal  Nuncio  that,  whatever  the  Diet  might  do,  Charles'  heart  was 
in  the  right  place.  If  he  often  assumed  the  role  of  papal  champion,  he 
could  on  occasion  remember  that  he  was  the  successor  of  Henry  IV,  and 
to  some  at  least  the  Sack  of  Rome  must  have  seemed  a  revenge  for  the 
scene  at  Canossa.  He  could  tell  Clement  that  that  outrage  was  the  just 
judgment  of  God,  he  could  seize  the  temporalities  of  the  bishopric  of 
Utrecht,  and  speak  disrespectfully  of  papal  excommunications.  He  could 
discuss  proposals  for  deposing  the  Pope  and  destroying  his  temporal 
power,  and  was  even  tempted  to  think  that  Luther  might  one  day 
become  of  importance  if  Clement  continued  to  thwart  the  imperial  plans. 

With  Charles,  as  with  every  prince  of  the  age,  including  the  Pope, 
political  far  outweighed  religious  motives.  Chivalry  and  the  crusading 
spirit  were  both  dead.  His  religious  faith  and  family  pride  might  both 
have  impelled  him  to  avenge  upon  Henry  VIII  the  wrongs  of  Catharine 
of  Aragon  ;  but  these,  he  said,  were  private  griefs ;  they  must  not  be 
allowed  to  interfere  with  the  public  considerations  which  compelled  him 


Effect  of  Charles^  reign  on  Germany  145 

to  conciliate  the  English  King  ;  and  his  one  aim  throughout  the  affair 
was  to  provide  for  the  succession  of  his  cousin  to  the  throne  of  England. 
That  was  a  clear  dynastic  issue  which  appealed  to  Charles  with  a  force 
which  no  other  motive  could  rival.  One  simple  principle  pervaded  the 
whole  of  Charles'  actions,  and  one  object  he  pursued  with  unswerving 
fidelity  throughout  his  public  career.  It  was  neither  the  conversion  of 
heretics  nor  the  overthrow  of  the  Turks  ;  it  was  not  even  a  national 
object,  for  Charles  was  too  cosmopolitan  and  his  lands  too  heterogeneous 
for  him  to  become  such  an  exponent  of  national  aspirations  as  Francis  I 
and  Henry  II  were  in  France,  or  Henry  VIII  and  Elizabeth  in  England. 
But  he  was  deeply  imbued  with  pride  in  the  Habsburg  race  and  faith 
in  the  family  star.  To  the  service  of  the  Habsburgs  he  devoted  his 
industry,  his  patience,  his  tenacity  of  purpose,  and  his  great  diplomatic 
abilities.  Therein  lay  the  reason  of  his  ultimate  failure  ;  in  the  end  the 
principle  of  nationality  defied  the  Habsburg  power,  and  not  a  foot  of 
the  land  conquered  by  Charles  remains  to  the  Spaniard  to-day. 

The  imperial  throne  of  Germany  v/as  thus  a  possession  which  Charles 
sought  to  use  in  the  Habsburg  interest ;  and  this  idea  dominated  not 
merely  his  foreign  policy  but  the  course  he  pursued  with  regard  to 
domestic  affairs.  He  was  told  by  his  minister,  Maximilian  von  Zeven- 
bergen,  that  the  only  means  to  prevent  the  Empire  from  becoming  a 
democratic  republic  like  Switzerland  was  the  extension  within  its  borders 
of  the  absolutist  Habsburg  power,  and  to  this  dynastic  use  the  Emperor 
turned,  so  far  as  he  could,  his  prerogative  as  national  sovereign.  The 
great  enemy  of  imperial  unity  was  the  territorial  principle,  and  Charles 
himself  regarded  it  as  such,  yet  he  never  hesitated  to  extend  his  territorial 
possessions  at  the  expense  of  the  national  government.  Every  element 
in  the  German  State  tended  towards  separation,  but  the  greatest  separatist 
of  all  was  the  Emperor.  Besides  virtually  severing  the  Netherlands 
from  the  Empire,  he  sought  to  exempt  his  hereditary  possessions  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  national  Courts  of  law,  from  contributing  to  the 
national  taxes,  and  from  sharing  the  burden  of  national  government. 
He  was  to  be  as  absolute  as  he  could  in  the  Empire  at  large,  but  while 
he  controlled  the  national  government,  the  national  government  was  to 
have  no  control  over  his  hereditary  lands.  It  mattered  little  how  much 
the  imperial  authority  diminished  provided  the  Habsburg  power  grew  ; 
no  one  should  henceforth  be  Emperor  unless  he  came  of  the  Habsburg 
race.  The  extent  of  his  heritage  was  greater  than  that  of  the  German 
Reicli,  and  he  thought  that  his  allegiance  to  his  family  transcended  his 
obligations  to  any  one  of  the  realms  over  which  he  ruled.  But,  so  far 
as  Germany  was  concerned,  the  Emperor  Charles  V  never  rose  from  a 
narrow  dynastic  to  a  broad  national  conception  of  his  duties  and  of  his 
opportunities  as  ruler  of  Germany.  Both  the  extent  of  the  realm  and 
the  authority  of  the  central  government  dwindled  under  his  sway ;  he 
narrowed  the  German  Reicli  and  weakened  the  Reichsregimeyit. 

C.    M.     H.    II.  10 


146  Diet  of  Worms  [1519-21 

While  German  national  interests  were  thus  subordinated  to  those 
of  a  family,  while  the  nominal  control  of  the  Empire's  foreign  policy 
was  vested  in  the  hands  of  one  who  regarded  Germany  as  only  a  piece 
in  the  game  of  dynastic  ambitions,  the  German  people  reaped  no 
corresponding  advantage  from  increased  security.  The  endless  roll  of 
principalities  and  powers  which  adorned  Charles  V's  style  and  dazzled 
the  eyes  of  the  Electors  proved  no  more  than  a  paper  wall  of  defence. 
The  Emperor's  strength  was  also  his  weakness ;  it  was  dissipated  all  over 
Europe,  and  though  Germans  turned  the  scale  in  Italy,  few  troops  came 
from  Spain  or  Burgundy  to  defend  the  Empire  against  the  Turks  or  the 
French.  While  Francis  I  and  Solyman  wielded  swords,  Charles  V 
seemed  to  brandish  an  armoury  of  cumbrous  weapons,  which  were  only 
of  use  if  used  all  together,  and  were  frequently  unavailable  at  the 
critical  moment.  Germany  had  to  look  to  itself  for  defence,  and  a 
further  element  of  separatism  was  fostered  by  the  consequent  tendency 
of  individual  Princes  to  make  arrangements  with  Charles'  enemies  behind 
the  Emperor's  back. 

The  nation  was  not  long  left  in  doubt  as  to  the  character  of  the  ruler 
whom  it  had  chosen  or  the  objects  he  meant  to  pursue.  German  envoys 
to  Spain  were  not  well  pleased  with  their  youthful  sovereign's  obvious 
devotion  to  priestly  rites,  or  with  the  intimation  that  they  must  negotiate 
in  the  Flemish  tongue  because  Charles  could  speak  neither  German  nor 
Latin.  Nor  was  his  first  act  as  Emperor  calculated  to  reassure  his 
people.  Amid  the  confusion  of  the  interregnum  Ulrich,  the  dispossessed 
Duke  of  Wiirttemberg,  attempted  to  recover  his  duchy ;  he  was  easily 
defeated  by  the  Swabian  League,  which  ceded  its  conquest  to  Charles 
on  repayment  of  the  cost  of  the  campaign.  Ulrich  was  a  ruffian  who 
deserved  no  consideration,  but  his  vices  did  not  abrogate  the  rights  of 
his  heirs,  and  it  was  utterly  repugnant  to  German  custom  and  sentiment 
for  the  Emperor  to  confer  a  fief  upon  himself.  No  territory,  however, 
was  so  convenient  for  the  extension  of  Austria's  influence  as  Wiirttem- 
berg ;  with  it  in  Habsburg  hands,  Zevenbergen  thought  that  Charles 
and  his  brother  would  dominate  Germany,  and  so  Wiirttemberg  passed 
into  Habsburg  possession,  with  Zevenbergen  as  its  governor. 

Troubles  in  Spain  and  adverse  winds  delayed  Charles'  departure 
from  the  shores  of  Galicia  until  May,  1520,  and  his  two  interviews  with 
Henry  VIII  further  postponed  his  coronation  at  Aachen  until  October  23. 
There  he  swore  to  observe  the  promises  made  before  his  election,  and  on 
November  1  he  summoned  a  Diet  to  meet  in  the  following  January. 
He  then  made  his  way  up  the  Rhine  to  Worms,  where,  on  January  28, 
the  day  sacred  to  Cliarles  the  Great,  he  opened  perhaps  the  most  famous 
of  all  the  Diets  in  German  history  (1521). 

The  dramatic  episode  of  Luther's  appearance  and  condemnation  by 
the  Edict  of  Worms  has,  however,  been  allowed  to  obscure  the  more 
important  business  of  the  Diet  and  to  convey  a  somewhat  misleading 


io2i]  Revolt  against  clerical  domination  147 

impression.  The  devils  on  the  roofs  of  the  houses  at  Worms  were  reality 
rather  friendly  to  Luther  than  otherwise,  and  the  renowned  Edict  itself 
was  not  so  much  an  expression  of  settled  national  policy  as  an  expedient, 
recommended  by  the  temporary  exigencies  of  the  Emperor's  foreign 
relations,  and  only  extorted  from  him  by  Leo's  promise  to  cease  from 
supporting  Charles'  foes.  Probably  Charles  himself  had  no  expectation 
of  seeing  the  Edict  executed,  and  certainly  the  Princes  who  passed  it  had 
no  such  desire.  They  were  much  more  intent  on  securing  redress  of 
their  grievances  against  the  Church  than  on  chastising  the  man  who 
had  attacked  their  common  enemy  ;  and  the  fact  that  the  Diet  which 
condemned  Luther's  heresy  also  solemnly  formulated  a  comprehensive 
indictment  against  the  Roman  Church  throws  a  vivid  liglit  upon  the 
twofold  aspect  which  the  Reformation  assumed  in  Germany  as  elsewhere. 

The  origin  of  the  whole  movement  was  a  natural  attempt  on  the 
part  of  man,  with  the  progress  of  enlightenment,  to  emancipate  himself 
from  the  clerical  tutelage  under  which  he  had  laboured  for  centuries, 
and  to  remedy  the  abuses  which  were  an  inevitable  outcome  of  the 
exclusive  privileges  and  authority  of  the  Church.  These  abuses  were 
traced  directly  or  indirectly  to  the  exemption  of  the  Church  and  its 
possessions  from  secular  control,  and  to  the  dominion  which  it  exercised 
over  the  laity  ;  and  the  revolt  against  this  position  of  immunity  and 
privilege  was  one  of  the  most  permanently  and  universally  successful 
movements  of  modern  history.  It  was  in  the  beginning  quite  indepen- 
dent of  dogma,  and  it  has  pervaded  Catholic  as  well  as  Protestant 
countries.  The  State  all  over  the  world  has  completely  deposed  the 
Church  from  the  position  it  held  in  the  Middle  Ages  ;  and  the  existence 
of  Churches,  Avhether  Catholic  or  Protestant,  in  the  various  political 
systems,  is  due  not  to  their  own  intrinsic  authority  but  to  the  fact  that 
they  are  tolerated  or  encouraged  by  the  State.  No  ecclesiastic  has  any 
appeal  from  the  temporal  laws  of  the  land  in  which  he  lives.  In  1521 
clerical  ministers  ruled  the  greater  part  of  Europe,  Wolsey  in  England, 
Adrian  in  Spain,  Du  Prat  in  France,  and  Matthew  Lang  to  no  small 
extent  in  Germany  ;  to-da}^  there  is  not  a  clerical  prime  minister  in 
the  world,  and  the  temporal  States  of  the  Catholic  Church  have  shrunk 
to  the  few  acres  covered  by  the  Vatican.  The  Church  has  ceased  to 
trespass  on  secular  territory  and  returned  to  her  original  spiritual 
domain. 

This  was,  roughly  speaking,  the  main  issue  of  the  Reformation  ;  it 
was  practically  universal,  while  the  dogmatic  questions  were  subsidiary 
and  took  different  forms  in  different  localities.  It  was  on  this  principle 
that  the  German  nation  was  almost  unanimous  in  its  opposition  to 
Rome,  and  its  feelings  were  accurately  reflected  in  the  Diet  at  Worms. 
Even  Frederick  of  Saxony  was  averse  from  Luther's  repudiation  of 
Catholic  doctrine,  but,  if  the  Reformer  had  confined  himself  to  an  attack 
on  the  Church  in  its  temporal  aspect,  Pope  and  Emperor  together  would 


148  State  of  popular  feeling  [i52i 

have  been  powerless  to  secure  his  condemnation.  The  whole  nation, 
wrote  a  canon  of  Worms,  was  of  one  mind  with  regard  to  clerical 
immorality,  from  Emperor  down  through  all  classes  to  the  last  man. 
Nine-tenths  of  Germany,  declared  the  papal  Nuncio,  cried  "Long  live 
Luther,"  and  the  other  tenth  shouted  "Death  to  the  Church."  Duke 
George  of  Saxony,  the  staunchest  of  Catholics,  was  calling  for  a  General 
Council  to  reform  abuses,  and  Gattinara,  Charles'  shrewdest  adviser, 
echoed  the  recommendation.  Even  Jean  Glapion,  the  Emperor's  con- 
fessor, was  believed  to  be  not  averse  from  an  accommodation  with 
Luther,  provided  that  he  would  disavow  the  Bahylonish  Captivity,  and 
in  Worms  itself  the  papal  emissaries  went  about  in  fear  of  assassination. 
The  Germans,  wrote  Tunstall  to  Wolsey  from  Worms,  were  everywhere 
so  addicted  to  Luther  that  a  hundred  thousand  of  them  would  lay 
•down  their  lives  to  save  him  from  the  penalties  pronounced  by  the 
Pope. 

This  popular  enthusiasm  for  Luther  led  Napoleon  to  express  the 
belief  that,  had  Charles  adopted  his  cause,  he  could  have  conquered 
Europe  at  the  head  of  a  united  Germany.  But  an  imperial  sanction 
of  Lutheran  ism  would  not  have  killed  the  separatist  tendencies  of 
German  politics,  nor  was  it  Lutheran  doctrine  which  had  captivated  the 
hearts  of  the  German  people.  He  was  the  hero  of  the  hour  solely 
because  he  stood  for  the  national  opposition  to  Rome.  The  circum- 
stances in  Germany  in  1521  were  not  very  dissimilar  from  those  in 
England  in  1529.  There  was  an  almost  universal  repugnance  to  clerical 
privilege  and  to  the  Roman  Curia,  but  the  section  of  the  nation  which 
was  prepared  to  repudiate  Catholic  dogma  was  still  insignificant ;  and  a 
really  national  government,  which  regarded  national  unity  as  of  more 
importance  than  the  immediate  triumph  of  any  religious  party,  would 
have  pursued  a  policy  something  like  that  of  Henry  VIH  in  his  later 
years.  It  would  have  kept  the  party  of  doctrinal  revolution  in  due 
subordination  to  the  national  movement  against  the  abuses  of  a  corrupt 
clerical  caste  and  an  Italian  domination ;  it  would  have  endeavoured  to 
satisfy  the  popular  demand  for  practical  reform,  without  alienating  the 
majority  by  surrendering  to  a  sectional  agitation  against  Catholic 
dogma.  But  both  the  man  and  the  forces  were  wanting.  Charles 
often  daljied  with  the  idea  of  a  limited  practical  reform,  and  he  had 
already  slighted  the  Papacy  by  allowing  Luther  to  be  heard  at  the  Diet 
of  Worms  after  his  condemnation  by  the  Pope,  as  if  an  imperial  edict 
were  of  more  effect  in  matters  of  faith  than  a  papal  Bull.  He  could 
hardly,  however,  be  Reformer  in  Germany  and  reactionary  in  Spain,  and 
the  necessities  of  his  dynastic  position  as  well  as  his  personal  feelings 
tied  him  to  the  Catholic  cause.  His  frequent  and  prolonged  periods  of 
absence  and  his  absorption  in  other  affairs  prevented  him  from  bestowing 
upon  the  government  of  (Germany  that  vigilant  and  concentrated  at- 
tention which  alone  enabled  Henry  VIII  to  effect  his  aims  in  England; 


I52i]  The  Reforms  instituted  at  Worms  149 

and  the  task  of  dealing  with  the  religious,  and  with  the  no  less  trouble- 
some political  and  social  discord  in  Germany,  was  left  to  the  Council  of 
Regency  and  practically,  for  five  years,  to  Ferdinand. 

The  composition  and  powers  of  this  body  were  among  the  chief 
questions  which  came  before  the  Diet  of  Worms.  When  the  electors 
extorted  from  Charles  a  promise  to  re-establish  the  Reichsregiment^  they 
had  in  their  mind  a  national  administration  like  that  suggested  by 
Berthold  of  Mainz  ;  when  Charles  gave  his  pledge,  he  was  thinking  of 
a  Council  which  should  be,  like  Maximilian's,  Aulic  rather  than  national  ; 
and  he  imagined  that  he  was  redeeming  his  pledge  when  he  proposed  to 
the  Diet  the  formation  of  a  government  which  was  to  have  no  control 
over  foreign  affairs,  and  a  control,  limited  by  his  own  assent,  over  do- 
mestic administration.  The  Regent  or  head  of  the  Council  and  six  of 
its  twenty  members  were  to  be  nominated  by  the  Emperor ;  these  were 
to  be  permanent,  but  the  other  fourteen,  representing  the  Empire,  were 
to  change  every  quarter.  This  body  was  to  have  no  power  over  Charles' 
hereditary  dominions,  nor  over  the  newly-won  Wiirttemberg.  The 
Emperor,  in  short,  was  to  control  the  national  government,  but  the  writs 
of  the  national  government  were  not  to  run  in  the  Habsburg  territories. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Princes  demanded  a  form  of  government  which 
would  have  practically  eliminated  the  imperial  factor  from  the  Empire  ; 
the  governing  Council  was  to  have  the  same  authority  whether  Charles 
himself  were  present  or  not,  it  was  to  decide  foreign  as  well  as  domestic 
questions,  and  in  it  the  Emperor  should  be  represented  only  in  the  same 
way  as  other  Princes,  namely,  by  a  proportionate  number  of  members 
chosen  from  his  hereditary  lands. 

In  the  compromise  which  followed  Charles  secured  the  decisive 
point.  The  government  which  was  formed  was  too  weak  to  weld 
Germany  into  a  political  whole,  able  to  withstand  the  disintegrating 
influence  of  its  own  particularism  and  of  the  Habsburg  dynastic  in- 
terest ;  and  Charles  was  left  free  to  pursue  throughout  his  reign  the 
old  imperial  maxim,  divide  et  impera.  The  Reiehsregiment  was  to  have 
independent  power  only  during  the  Emperor's  absence  ;  at  other  times 
it  was  to  sink  into  an  advisory  body,  and  important  decisions  must 
always  have  his  assent.  He  Avas  to  nominate  the  president  and  four  out 
of  the  Council's  twenty -two  members  ;  but  his  own  dominions  were  to  be 
subject  to  its  authority,  the  determination  of  religious  questions  was  left 
largely  in  the  hands  of  the  Estates,  and  Charles  undertook  to  form  no 
leagues  or  alliances  affecting  the  Empire  without  the  Council's  consent. 
The  reconstitution  of  the  supreme  national  court  of  justice  or  Reichs- 
Tcammergericht  presented  few  variations  from  the  form  adopted  at  Con- 
stance in  1507,  and  the  ordinance  establishing  it  is  almost  word  for 
word  the  same  as  the  original  proposal  of  Berthold  of  Mainz  in  1495 ; 
the  imperial  influence  was  slightly  increased  by  the  provision  permitting 
him  to  nominate  two  additional  assessors  to  the  Court,  but,  being  paid 


150  Growth  of  the  power  of  the  Princes 

by  the  Empire  and  not  by  the  Emperor,  its  members  retained  their 
independence. 

A  measure  which  ultimately  proved  to  be  of  more  importance  than 
the  reorganisation  of  these  two  institutions  was  the  partition  of  the  Habs- 
burg  inheritance.  One  of  the  most  cherished  projects  of  Ferdinand  of 
Aragon  had  been  the  creation  in  northern  Italy  of  a  kingdom  for  the 
benefit  of  the  younger  of  his  two  grandsons,  which  would  have  left 
Charles  free  to  retain  his  Austrian  lands.  That  scheme  had  failed  ;  but 
the  younger  Ferdinand,  especially  when  he  became  betrothed  to  the 
heiress  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia,  could  not  decently  remain  unendowed 
while  his  brother  possessed  so  much  ;  and  on  April  28,  1521,  a  contract 
was  ratified  transferring  to  Ferdinand  the  five  Austrian  duchies,  of 
Austria,  Carinthia,  Caruiola,  Styria,  and  Tyrol.  This  grant  formed  the 
nucleus  of  the  present  so-called  Dual  INIonarchy  ;  it  was  gradually  ex- 
tended by  the  transference  to  Ferdinand  of  all  Charles  V's  possessions 
and  claims  in  Germany,  and  the  success  with  which  the  younger  brother 
governed  his  German  subjects  made  them  regret  that  Ferdinand  had 
not  been  elected  Emperor  in  1519  instead  of  having  to  wait  thirty-seven 
years  for  the  prize. 

Soon  after  the  conclusion  of  the  Diet  of  Worms  Charles  left  Ger- 
many, which  he  was  not  to  see  again  until  nine  years  later  ;  and  long 
before  then  the  attempt  of  the  central  government  to  control  the 
disruptive  forces  of  political  and  religious  separatism  had  hopelessly 
broken  down.  A  pathetic  interest  attaches  to  the  intervening  struggles 
of  the  Reichsregimentiis,  being  the  last  efforts  to  create  a  modern  German 
national  State  co-extensive  with  the  medieval  Empire,  a  State  which 
would  have  included  not  only  the  present  German  Empire,  but  Austria 
and  the  Netherlands,  and  which,  stretching  from  the  shores  of  the  Baltic 
to  those  of  the  Adriatic  sea,  and  from  the  Straits  of  Dover  to  the 
Niemen  or  the  Vistula,  would  have  dominated  modern  Europe ;  and  a 
good  deal  of  angry  criticism  has  been  directed  against  the  particularist 
bodies  which  one  after  another  repudiated  the  authority  of  the  gov- 
ernment and  brought  its  work  to  nought.  But  particularism  had  so 
completely  permeated  Germany  that  the  very  efforts  at  unity  were 
themselves  tainted  with  particularist  motives ;  and  one  reason  alike  for 
the  favour  with  which  Prhices  like  Frederick  of  Saxony  regarded  the 
Reichisregiment,  and  for  its  ultimate  failure,  was  that,  with  its  ostensible 
unifying  purpose,  tlie  government  combined  aims  which  served  the 
interests  of  Princes  against  those  of  other  classes. 

The  great  Princes  of  the  Empire  present  a  double  aspect,  varying 
witli  the  point  of  view  from  which  they  are  regarded.  To  Charles  they 
were  collectively  an  oligarchy  which  threatened  to  destroy  the  monarch- 
ical principle  embodied  in  the  person  of  the  Emperor  ;  but  individually 
and  from  the  point  of  view  of  their  own  dominions  they  represented  a 
monarchical  principle  similar  to  that  which  gave  unity  and  strength  to 


1521-2]  Difficulties  of  the  Keichsregiment  151 

France,  to  England,  and  to  Spain,  a  territorial  principle  more  youthful 
and  more  vigorous  than  the  effete  KaUertmn.  The  force  of  political 
gravitation  had  already  modified  profoundly  the  internal  constitution  of 
the  Empire ;  States  like  Saxony,  Brandenburg,  and  Bavaria  had  acquired 
consistency  and  weight,  and  began  to  exercise  an  attraction  over 
the  numberless  molecules  of  the  Empire  which  the  more  distant  and 
nebulous  luminary  of  the  Kaisertum  could  not  counteract.  The  petty 
knight,  the  cities  and  towns,  found  it  ever  more  difficult  to  resist 
the  encroachments  of  neighbouring  Princes;  and  princely  influence 
over  municipal  elections  and  control  over  municipal  finance  went  on 
increasing  throughout  the  sixteenth  century,  till  towards  its  end  the 
former  autonomy  of  all  but  a  select  number  of  cities  had  well-nigh 
disappeared.  It  was  not  from  the  Emperor  but  from  the  Princes  that 
knights  and  burgesses  feared  attacks  on  their  liberties,  and  their  danger 
threw  them  into  an  attitude  of  hostility  to  the  Reichsregiment,  a  body 
by  means  of  which  the  Princes  sought  to  exercise  in  their  own  interests 
the  national  power.  They  could  also  appeal  to  the  higher  motive  of 
imperial  unity ;  the  strength  of  individual  Princes  meant  the  weakness 
of  the  Emperor,  and  unity  in  parts  might  seem  to  be  fatal  to  the  unity 
of  the  whole. 

The  Diet  of  Worms  had  in  fact  been  a  struggle  between  Emperor 
and  Princes,  in  which  neither  had  paid  much  regard  to  inferior  classes, 
and  the  spoils  were  divided  exclusively  between  the  two  combatants. 
The  knightly  order  was  denied  all  share  in  the  government  of  the 
Empire ;  they  could  expect  no  more  consideration  than  before  in  their 
endless  disputes  over  territory  with  their  more  powerful  neighbours, 
and  the  ReicJisTcammergericht  with  its  Roman  law  they  regarded  as  an 
insufferable  infringement  of  their  own  feudal  franchises.  The  cities 
were  not  less  discontented.  They  had  been  refused  au}^  representation 
in  the  Reichsregiment,  subsidies  had  been  voted  without  their  concurrence, 
and  they  anticipated  with  reason  fresh  taxation  which  would  fall  mainly 
on  their  shoulders. 

The  new  government  was  established  at  Niirnberg  in  November, 
1521,  and  in  the  following  February  it  met  the  Diet.  The  first  business 
was  to  raise  forces  to  serve  against  the  Turks  before  whose  advance 
Belgrade  had  just  fallen ;  and  Avith  Charles'  consent  a  portion  of  the 
supplies  voted  for  the  Emperor's  abandoned  journey  to  Rome  was 
applied  to  this  purpose.  Greater  difficulty  was  experienced  in  finding 
means  to  defray  the  expenses  of  the  imperial  council  and  court  of 
justice.  It  was  proposed  to  revert  to  the  Common  Penny,  to  tax  the 
Jews,  and  to  apply  the  annates  of  the  German  Church,  which  supported 
the  Roman  Curia,  to  the  purposes  of  the  national  government.  But  all 
these  suggestions  were  rejected  in  favour  of  a  scheme  which  offered  the 
threefold  advantage  of  promoting  German  unity,  of  relieving  German 
capitalists  of  some    of   their   superfluous  wealth,  and   of   sparing  the 


152  Proposal  to  tax  exports  and  imports  [i522 

pockets  of  those  who  voted  the  tax.  All  classes  had  soon  perceived 
that  there  could  be  no  peace  and  no  justice  unless  somebody  paid  for  its 
maintenance  and  administration,  and  with  one  voice  tliey  began  to 
excuse  themselves  from  the  honour  of  providing  the  funds.  It  was 
necessary,  however,  to  select  a  victim,  and  the  choice  of  the  mercantile 
interest  was  received  with  acclamation  by  every  other  class  in  Germany. 

The  commercial  revolution  which  marked  the  end  of  the  fifteenth 
and  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  had  led,  as  such  revolutions 
always  do,  to  the  rapid  and  disproportionate  accumulation  of  wealth  in 
the  hands  of  the  few  who  knew  how  to  exploit  it ;  and  the  consequent 
growth  of  luxury  and  increase  of  the  power  of  mercantile  magnates  were 
a  constant  theme  of  denunciation  in  the  mouths  of  less  fortunate  men. 
The  canonist  doctrine  of  usury,  based  on  the  Scriptural  prohibition,  still 
held  sway  in  all  but  commercial  circles,  and  the  forestalling  and  regrating, 
against  which  the  English  statute-book  is  so  eloquent,  excited  no  less 
odium  in  Germany.  Theologians  united  with  lawyers  in  denouncing 
the  Fuggerei  of  the  great  trading  companies;  Luther  and  Zwingli, 
Hutten  and  Erasmus  were  of  one  mind  on  the  question.  Erasmus 
described  the  merchants  as  the  basest  of  all  mankind,  and  it  was  partly 
due  to  this  feeling  that  the  lawless  robbery  of  traders  at  the  hands 
of  roving  knights  went  on  openly  without  an  attempt  to  check  it ; 
the  humanist,  Heinrich  Bebel,  even  declared  that  the  victims  owed  their 
captors  a  debt  of  gratitude  because  the  seizure  of  their  ill-gotten  goods 
smoothed  their  path  to  heaven. 

This  moral  antipathy  to  the  evil  effects  of  wealth,  as  exhibited  in 
other  people,  was  reinforced  by  the  prevalent  idea  that  money  and 
riches  were  synonymous  terms,  and  that  the  German  nation  was  being 
steadily  impoverished  by  the  export  of  precious  metals  to  pay  for  the 
imports  it  received  from  other  countries,  and  especially  English  cloth 
and  Portuguese  spices.  It  was  felt  that  some  check  must  be  put  upon 
the  process,  and  a  national  tax  on  imports  and  exports  would,  it  was 
thought,  cure  this  evil,  satisfy  at  once  the  moral  indignation  of  people 
and  Princes  against  capitalists  and  their  selfish  desire  for  fiscal  immunity, 
and  provide  a  stable  financial  basis  for  the  national  executive  and  judicial 
system,  for  the  defence  of  the  realm  against  foreign  foes,  and  for  the 
maintenance  of  peace  witliin  its  borders.  The  measure  as  passed  by  the 
Diet  of  Niirnberg  in  1522  exempted  all  the  necessaries  of  life,  but  imposed 
a  duty  of  four  per  cent,  on  all  other  merchandise,  to  be  paid  on  exports 
as  well  as  on  imports.  Custom-houses  were  to  be  erected  along  the  whole 
frontier  of  the  Empire,  which  Avas  defined  for  the  purpose.  Switzerland 
refused  its  consent  and  was  excluded,  and  so  were  Bohemia  and  Prussia, 
the  latter  as  being  a  fief  of  Poland,  but  the  Netherlands  were  reckoned  as 
an  integral  part  of  the  Empire ;  and,  had  the  project  been  carried  out, 
it  would  have  provided  not  only  the  revenues  wliicli  \vere  its  immediate 
object,  but  an  invaluable  lever  for  the  unilieation  of  Germany. 


1523]  Resistance  of  the  cities  153 

Not  content,  however,  with  this  victory  over  the  moneyed  classes 
obtained  through  the  co-operation  of  their  own  particular  interests  with 
a  national  sentiment,  nor  with  the  further  prohibition  of  all  trading 
companies  possessing  a  capital  of  more  than  fifty  thousand  crowns,  the 
Princes  proceeded  at  the  Diet  held  at  Niirnberg  in  November,  1522, 
to  strike  at  the  imperial  cities  which  had  hitherto  refrained  from 
making  common  cause  with  the  capitalists.  In  language  which  reminds 
English  readers  of  James  I,  they  affirmed  that  the  participation  of  the 
cities  in  the  affairs  of  the  Empire  was  not  a  matter  of  right,  but  of 
grace  and  a  privilege  which  might  be  withdrawn  at  pleasure  ;  when 
the  Electors  and  Princes  had  agreed  on  a  measure,  the  cities,  they 
said,  had  nothing  to  do  but  consent,  and  they  were  now  required  to 
levy  a  contribution  towards  the  Turkish  war  which  had  been  voted 
without  their  concurrence. 

The  golden  age  of  the  towms  had  passed  away  in  Germany  as  well  as 
in  Italy,  their  brilliant  part  in  history  had  been  played  out,  and  they 
were  already  jdelding  place  to  greater  political  organisations ;  but  they 
were  not  yet  prepared  to  surrender  to  the  Princes  without  a  struggle. 
At  a  congress  of  cities  held  at  Speier  in  March,  1523,  it  was  resolved  to 
appeal  from  the  Reichsregiment  to  the  Emperor,  and  an  embassy  was  sent 
to  lay  their  case  before  Charles  at  Valladolid  in  August.  At  first  the 
imperial  Court  took  up  an  attitude  of  real  or  feigned  hostility  to  their 
demands,  and  there  seems  to  be  no  conclusive  evidence  that  this  revolt 
against  the  national  government  had  been  encouraged  by  Charles.  Yet 
the  particularist  interest  of  the  cities  appealed  to  the  particularist  interest 
of  the  Emperor  with  a  force  which  he  could  not  resist.  The  opposition 
had  been  engineered  by  the  Fuggers ;  and  Charles'  chronic  insolvency 
rendered  him  peculiarly  susceptible  to  the  arguments  which  they  could 
best  apply ;  Jacob  Fugger  had  even  boasted  that  to  him  and  his  house 
Charles  owed  his  election  as  Emperor.  So  now  the  deputies  undertook 
that  Charles  should  not  lose  financially  by  granting  their  request,  and 
they  also  promised  his  councillors  a  grateful  return  for  their  trouble. 
Other  grounds  were  alleged ;  it  was  hinted  that  the  Princes  would  use 
the  proceeds  of  the  tax  in  a  way  that  boded  no  good  to  the  imperial 
power  in  Germany  ;  there  was  a  scheme  in  hand  for  the  appointment  of 
a  King  of  the  Romans  who  with  adequate  financial  support  might 
reduce  the  Emperor  to  a  cipher ;  moreover  the  Reichsregiment  which 
required  this  revenue  was  itself  superfluous  ;  if  Charles  would  select  a 
trustworthy  Regent  and  maintain  the  Kammergericht,  that  would  meet 
all  the  exigencies  of  the  case,  and  his  own  position  in  the  Empire  would 
be  materially  strengthened.  Finally,  to  remove  Charles"  suspicions  of 
the  cities  based  on  their  alleged  countenance  of  Lutheranism,  they 
made  the  somewhat  confident  assertion  that  not  a  syllable  of  Luther's 
works  had  been  printed  in  their  jurisdiction  for  years,  and  that  it 
was  not  with  them  that  Luther  and   his  followers  found  protection. 


154  The  knightly  order  and  Sickingen  [1522 

Satisfied  with  these  assurances  Charles  intimated  that  he  would  take  the 
government  into  his  own  hands,  aj^point  a  Regent  and  a  fresh  Kammer- 
>/ericht,  forbid  the  imposition  of  the  obnoxious  tax,  and  prohibit  the 
.Regiment  from  dealing  with  monopolies  without  again  asking  his  con- 
sent. The  first  great  blow  at  the  national  government  had  been  struck 
by  the  Emperor  at  the  instigation  of  the  German  cities ;  another  was 
at  the  moment  being  struck  by  the  German  nobility  and  a  section  of 
the  German  Princes. 

Of  all  the  disorderly  elements  in  the  German  Empire  the  most 
dangerous  was  the  Ritterschaft,  a  class  whose  characteristics  are  not 
adequately  denoted  by  the  nearest  English  equivalent,  "knights." 
Their  bearing  towards  the  government  and  towards  the  other  Estates 
of  the  realm  recalls  that  of  the  English  baronage  under  Stephen  and 
Henry  II,  and  another  parallel  to  their  position  may  be  found  in  the 
Polish  nobles  or  "gentlemen"  whose  success  in  reducing  the  other 
elective  monarchy  in  Europe  to  anarchj^  would  probably  have  been 
repeated  by  the  German  Ritterschaft  but  for  the  restraining  force  of 
the  territorial  Princes.  Like  the  English  barons  and  the  Polish  nobles 
they  recognised  no  superior  but  their  monarch,  enjoyed  no  occupation 
so  much  as  private  war,  and  resisted  every  attempt  to  establish  orderly 
government.  They  had  special  grievances  in  the  early  part  of  the 
sixteenth  century ;  the  development  of  commerce  was  accompanied  by 
a  corresponding  agricultural  depression  ;  and  while  wealth  in  the  towns 
increased  and  prices  rose,  the  return  from  rents  and  services  remained 
stationary  unless  they  were  exploited  on  commercial  principles.  In 
France  and  in  England  under  strong  monarchies  the  lords  of  the  land 
saved  their  financial  position  by  sheep-farming,  enclosures,  and  other 
businesslike  pursuits,  but  in  Germany  pride,  or  inadaptability,  or  special 
facilities  for  private  war  kept  the  knights  from  resorting  to  such  ex- 
pedients, and  their  main  support  was  wholesale  brigandage.  They  took 
to  robbery  as  to  a  trade  and  considered  it  rather  an  honour  to  be 
likened  to  wolves.  Like  wolves,  however,  they  were  generally  hungry.; 
the  organisation  of  territorial  States  and  the  better  preservation  of  peace 
had,  moreover,  rendered  their  trade  at  once  more  dangerous  and  unprofit- 
able ;  and  in  1522  there  were  knights  who  lived  in  peasants'  cottages,  and 
possessed  incomes  of  no  more  than  fourteen  crowns  a  year. 

To  their  poverty  fresh  burdens  were  added  by  the  reforms  of  the 
national  government ;  the  prohibition  of  private  war,  the  supersession 
of  their  ancient  feudal  customs  by  the  newly-received  Roman  law,  the 
constant  pressure  of  their  powerful  neighbours  the  Princes,  drove  them 
into  a  position  of  chronic  discontent;  and  in  the  summer  of  1522  the 
knight«  of  the  middle  and  upper  Rhine  provinces  assembled  at  Landau 
and  resolved  to  repudiate  the  authority  of  the  ReichsJcammergericht  on 
the  ground  that  it  was  dominated  by  the  influence  of  their  natural  foes, 
the  Princes.     They  found  a  leader  in  the  notorious  Franz  von  Sickingen, 


1522-3]  The  knights'  tuar  155 

who  has  been  regarded  both  as  the  champion  of  the  poorer  classes  and 
as  a  Gospel  pioneer.  Probably  his  motives  were  mainly  personal  and 
he  adopted  the  cause  of  his  fellow-knights  only  because  that  role  suited 
his  private  purposes.  Charles  V  had  taken  him  into  his  service  and 
employed  him  in  the  war  with  France,  but  Sickingen's  success  and 
rewards  had  not  been  commensurate  with  his  hopes,  and  he  sought  other 
means  to  satisfy  the  extravagant  ambition  of  becoming  Elector  of  Trier 
or  even  a  King. 

A  decent  cloak  for  his  private  ends  and  for  the  class  interests  of  the 
knights  was  found  in  the  religious  situation.  Sickingen  was  apparently  a 
genuine  Lutheran ;  Bucer  lived  in  his  castle,  the  Ebernburg,  Oecolampa- 
dius  preached  to  his  followers,  and  four  hundred  knights  had  undertaken 
Luther's  defence  at  the  Diet  of  Worms.  The  Reformer  was  grateful 
and  addressed  Sickingen  as  his  especial  lord  and  patron.  He  looked  to 
the  Bitter  as  a  sword  of  the  Gospel,  and  openly  incited  them  to  rise 
and  spoil  the  unregenerate  priests  and  prelates ;  while  Hutten,  Avhose 
sympathies  were  naturally  on  the  knightly  side,  urged  Sickingen  to 
emulate  Ziska,  and  endeavoured  to  enlist  the  towns  in  the  service  of 
the  opposition  to  their  common  foe,  the  territorial  Princes.  Some 
of  these  Princes  were,  however,  already  half  Lutherans  ;  the  Elector 
of  Saxony  was  Luther's  great  patron,  the  Elector  Palatine  was  full  of 
doubts,  and  in  any  case  was  no  friend  to  the  Bishops,  and  prudence 
forbade  open  war  in  the  ranks  of  the  Reformers.  An  ingenious  method 
of  avoiding  it,  and  of  combining  secular  and  religious  interests  under 
Sickingen's  banner,  was  found  in  the  proposal  to  limit  the  attack  to  the 
ecclesiastical  Princes  whose  worldly  goods  were  an  offence  to  Lutheran 
divines,  whose  jurisdiction  was  a  perpetual  grievance  to  the  cities,  and 
whose  territorial  powers  infringed  knightly  liberties. 

And  so,  when  in  August,  1522,  Sickingen  revived  his  feUd  with  the 
Archbishop-Elector  of  Trier  and  entered  his  territory  at  the  head  of 
an  army  which  he  had  levied  nominally  for  the  Emperor's  service,  he  had 
some  hopes  of  success.  The  government  put  him  under  the  ban  of  the 
Empire,  but  Sickingen  laughed'at  threats  and  proceeded  to  carry  on  the 
controvers}'  with  fire  and  sword.  Unfortunately  these  arguments  were 
double-edged,  and  Trier  to  which  he  laid  siege  offered  an  unexpected 
resistance.  The  Archbishop  himself  evinced  a  martial  valour  at  least 
equal  to  his  spiritual  zeal,  and  the  knightly  emissaries  met  with  no 
response  to  their  appeals  from  the  people  of  the  city  ;  the  traders  had 
suffered  too  much  from  the  wolves  outside  to  wish  to  see  them,  even 
though  they  came  in  sheep's  clothing,  encamped  within  their  walls.  The 
allies  whom  Sickingen  expected  from  Franconia  were  intercepted,  and  on 
September  14  he  was  forced  to  raise  the  siege  and  to  retreat  to  his 
stronghold  at  Landstuhl.  Here  he  thought  himself  secure  against  any 
attack  ;  but  his  elaborate  fortifications  were  not  proof  against  the  new 
and  powerful  artiller}-  which  the  Princes  brought  into  the  field.     In 


156  Failure  of  the  Reich sregiment  [i524 

April,  1523,  his  walls  crumbled  before  it,  he  was  himself  mortally 
wounded  by  a  splinter  of  stone,  and  died  soon  after  his  surrender.  He 
was  the  last  of  the  German  Ritter,  and  the  cannon  which  battered  his 
castle  were  symbolical  of  the  forces  which  proved  fatal  to  the  inde- 
pendence of  his  class. 

This  victory  over  one  of  the  most  formidable  disruptive  forces 
in  the  Empire  might  have  been  expected  to  strengthen  the  national 
government,  but  it  was  won  in  spite  of,  and  not  by,  the  Reichsregiment. 
That  body  had  been  unable  to  keep  the  peace  even  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  of  Niirnberg  where  it  sat,  and  whither  its  members  came  in 
disguise  to  avoid  molestation  at  the  hands  of  knightly  robbers.  Still 
less  could  it  cope  with  a  force  like  that  at  Sickingen's  disposal,  and  the 
rebellion  had  been  put  down  by  three  Princes,  the  Elector  Palatine,  the 
Archbishop  of  Trier,  and  the  young  Landgrave,  Philip  of  Hesse,  who  had 
acted  on  their  own  responsibility  and  in  conjunction  with  the  Swabiau 
League,  an  organisation  embodying  within  itself  prelates,  Princes,  lesser 
nobility,  and  towns,  but  working  in  its  external  relations  for  the 
furtherance  of  the  particularist  interests  of  the  House  of  Austria.  This 
ulliance  had  early  in  the  course  of  the  revolt  taken  matters  into  its  own 
hands  and  treated  the  government  with  as  much  contempt  as  Sickingen 
had  done  himself.  As  a  natural  result  the  Reichsregiment  began  to 
incline  to  the  knightly  side,  and  Frederick  of  Saxony  came  to  an 
agreement  with  the  rebels.  Neither  event  had  any  effect  upon  the 
result  of  the  struggle.  After  the  fall  of  Landstuhl  the  three  Princes 
and  the  Swabian  League  proceeded  to  crush  the  Franconian  knights. 
This  was  done  with  little  difficulty,  their  power  was  broken  for  ever,  and 
Ulricli  von  Hutten  fled  to  Switzerland,  where  he  died  soon  afterwards 
in  the  midst  of  a  controversy  with  his  former  friend  Erasmus.  The 
victors  then  punished  the  offenders  and  divided  their  spoils  without 
the  least  reference  to  the  wishes  or  commands  of  the  government ;  and 
the  main  result  of  the  episode  was  to  exhibit  in  startling  contrast  the 
impotence  of  the  Reichsregiment  and  the  vigour  of  the  territorial  power 
of  individual  Princes. 

The  Regiment  was  visibly  tottering  to  its  fall,  and  in  January, 
1524,  it  met  the  Diet  for  the  last  time  at  Niirnberg.  Frederick  of 
Saxony  came  prepared  with  a  sheaf  of  reforms,  but  it  was  a  question  of 
ending  and  not  of  mending,  and  with  that  determination  in  their  minds 
the  various  sections  of  the  opposition  gathered  in  force.  The  deputies 
of  the  towns  had  returned  from  Spain  bringing  the  Emperor's  veto  on 
the  one  practicable  means  of  financing  the  administration.  Charles' 
chancellor,  Franz  Hannart,  followed  to  fan  the  discontent.  The  wealth 
of  Germany  was  ranged  against  the  government  which  had  endeavoured 
to  abolish  monopolies,  to  tax  trade,  and  to  restrict  the  operations  of 
capital.  Duke  George  of  Saxony  had  already  declined  to  support  an 
authority  which  had  shown  itself  so  powerless  to  enforce  respect  for  its 


Victory  of  the  territorial  principle  157 

decrees,  and  the  three  Princes  of  the  Palatinate,  of  Trier,  and  of  Hesse 
had  withdrawn  their  representatives  from  tlie  Reichsregiment.  Tlie 
Swabian  League  was  encouraged  to  resist  encroaclunents  on  its  autonomy, 
and  the  two  main  supports  of  the  administration,  the  Electors  of  Mainz 
and  Saxony,  were  engaged  in  personal  quarrels.  Wlien  the  Diet  opened, 
one  after  another  of  the  representatives  of  the  vested  interests  rose  to 
denounce  the  government,  and  a  practical  vote  of  censure  was  carried  by 
the  refusal  of  the  Diet  to  consider  any  scheme  for  raising  revenue  until 
the  administration  was  changed. 

So  ended  the  last  attempt  to  create  a  national  government  for  the 
medieval  German  Empire.  The  Reichsregiment  was  indeed  continued, 
but  it  was  removed  to  Esslingen,  where  it  sat  under  the  shadow  of 
Austrian  domination,  and  was  shorn  of  the  little  independent  authority 
it  had  wielded  before.  Germany  was  submerged  under  a  flood  of  con- 
stitutional chaos  and  personal  rivalry.  Ferdinand  was  plotting  against 
the  Elector  of  Saxony  ;  many  Princes  were  alienated  from  Charles  by  his 
failure  to  pay  their  pensions  ;  and  Francis  I  was  seeking  to  fish  in  the 
troubled  waters.  The  experiment  of  the  Reichsregiment  had,  in  fact, 
been  foredoomed  to  failure  from  the  first ;  the  government  contained 
within  itself  the  seeds  of  its  own  disruption  because  its  aims  had  not 
been  single  or  disinterested.  It  was  an  attempt  at  national  unity 
dominated  by  particularist  interests.  The  opposition  of  the  towns  and 
of  tlie  knights  had  not  been  evoked  because  the  government  sought 
national  unity  but  because  it  administered  the  national  authority  in  the 
interests  of  territorial  Princes  ;  the  single  city  of  Niirnberg  had  for 
instance  been  taxed  higher  than  any  one  of  the  Electors.  Nor  would 
national  unity  have  been  secured  if  the  oligarchy  of  Princes  had  per- 
petuated its  control  of  the  government,  for  the  individual  members 
would  soon  have  quarrelled  among  themselves.  Their  dissensions  were, 
indeed,  patent  even  when  their  collective  authority  was  threatened  by 
common  enemies.  Each,  wrote  Hannart  to  his  master,  wanted  to  have 
the  affairs  of  the  Empire  regulated  according  to  his  individual  taste  ; 
they  all  demanded  a  national  government  and  a  national  system  of 
judicature,  but  no  one  would  tolerate  the  interference  of  these  institu- 
tions in  his  own  household  and  jurisdiction  ;  everyone  in  short  wished 
to  be  master  himself. 

In  such  circumstances  Charles  was  perhaps  justified  in  preferring, 
like  the  rest,  the  extension  of  his  own  territorial  power  to  every 
other  object.  He  may  have  perceived  the  impossibility  of  founding 
national  unity  on  a  discredited  imperial  system.  Unity  did  not  come 
through  any  of  the  methods  suggested  by  the  reforming  Diets  ;  it  only 
came  when  the  imperial  decay,  which  they  tried  to  check,  had  run  its 
full  course  and  the  Emperor's  supremacy  had  succumbed  to  the  principle 
of  territorial  monarchy.  To  the  extension  of  that  principle  by  methods 
of  blood  and  iron  Germany  owes  her  modern  unity  as  England,  France, 


158  Failure  of  the  Edict  of  Worms  [1521-3 

and  Spain  owed  their  unity  in  the  sixteenth  century.  It  was  the  most 
potent  political  principle  then  fermenting  in  Europe  ;  destroying  the 
old,  it  led  to  the  construction  of  the  new. 

The  failure  of  the  attempt  at  political  reform  involved  the  ruin  of 
all  hopes  of  a  religious  settlement  which  should  be  either  peaceful  or 
national,  for  the  only  instrument  by  which  such  an  object  could  have 
been  achieved  was  broken  in  pieces.  Each  political  organism  within 
the  Empire, was  left  to  work  out  its  own  salvation  at  its  own  option 
without  the  stimulus  or  control  of  a  central  government  ;  and  the 
contrast  between  the  course  of  the  Reformation  in  Germany  and 
its  development  in  England  affords  some  facilities  for  comparing  the 
relative  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  a  strong  national  monarchy. 
In  Germany  at  all  events  there  can  be  no  pretence  that  the  whole 
movement  was  due  to  the  arbitrary  caprice  of  an  absolute  King.  To 
whatever  extent  it  may  have  had  its  roots  in  the  baser  passions  of 
mankind,  it  was  at  least  a  popular  manifestation.  It  came  from 
below,  and  not  from  above.  Charles  V  was  hostile  from  conviction  and 
from  the  exigencies  of  his  personal  position  ;  the  ecclesiastical  Princes 
Avere  hostile  from  interest  if  not  from  conviction  ;  of  the  temporal 
Princes  only  one  could  be  described  as  friendly,  and  even  Frederick  of 
Saxony  was  not  yet  a  Lutheran.  He  was  still  treasuring  a  collection 
of  relics  and  he  had  spoken  severely  of  Luther's  Bahylonish  Captivity. 
His  attitude  towards  all  religious  movements,  however  extravagant,  was 
rather  that  of  Gamaliel,  on  whose  advice  to  the  Sanhedrim  he  seems  to 
have  modelled  his  action  ;  if  they  were  of  men  they  would  come 
to  nought  of  themselves,  and  rather  than  be  found  fighting  against 
God  he  would  take  his  staff  in  his  hand  and  quit  his  dominions  for 
ever. 

But  whatever  animosity  the  authorities  may  have  entertained  against 
the  movement  was  neutralised  by  their  impotence.  The  Edict  of  Worms 
left  nothing  to  be  desired  in  the  comprehensiveness  of  its  condemnations 
or  in  the  severity  of  its  penalties,  and  the  Roman  hierarchy  was  particu- 
larly gratified  by  the  subjection  of  the  press  to  rigid  censorship  and  by 
the  relegation  of  its  exercise  to  the  Church.  But,  while  the  Edict  had 
been  sanctioned  hy  the  national  Diet,  its  execution  depended  entirely 
upon  local  authorities  who  were  reluctant  to  enforce  it  in  face  of  the 
almost  universal  disapproval.  The  Primate  himself,  the  Archbishop  of 
Mainz,  for  fear  of  riots  refused  his  clergy  licence  even  to  preach  against 
the  outlawed  monk  ;  and  at  Constance,  for  instance,  not  only  was  the 
publication  of  the  Edict  refused,  but  the  imperial  commissioners  who 
came  to  secure  its  execution  were  driven  out  of  the  city  with  threats. 
P>oth  the  Edict  of  Charles  and  the  Bull  of  Leo  remained  dead  letters  in 
Germany  outside  the  private  domains  of  the  House  of  Habsburg  ;  and 
the  chief  effect  of  the  campaign  of  the  allied  Pope,  Emperor,  and  King 


1521-5]      TJie  Reformation  a  middle  class  movement        159 

of  England  against  Lutlier  was  a  bonfire  of  the  heretic's  works  in 
London  and  another  at  Ghent. 

The  censorship  of  the  press  was  never  more  ludicrously  ineffective 
to  stop  a  revolution.  In  spite  of  it  the  number  of  books  issued  from 
German  printing-presses  in  1523  was  more  than  twelve  times  as  great  as 
the  number  issued  ten  years  before,  and  of  these  four-fifths  were  devoted 
to  the  cause  of  the  Reformation.  It  was  only  with  great  difficulty  that 
printers  could  be  induced  to  publish  works  in  defence  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  they  had  often  to  be  repaid  for  the  loss  in  which  the 
limited  circulation  of  such  books  involved  them.  On  the  other 
hand  Luther's  own  writings,  violent  satires  like  the  Karsthans  and 
Neukarsthans^  and  Hans  Sachs'  Wittenhergische  JVachtic/all,  enjoyed  an 
immense  popularity.  The  effervescence  of  the  national  mind  evoked  a 
literature  vigorous  but  rude  in  form  and  coarse  in  expression,  the 
common  burden  of  which  was  invective  against  the  Church,  and  especially 
the  monastic  orders  ;  and  this  indigenous  literature  stirred  to  passion 
the  mass  of  the  lower  middle  classes  which  the  alien  and  esoteric 
ideals  of  the  Humanists  had  failed  to  touch.  The  pencil  was  scarcely 
less  effective  than  the  pen  ;  Albrecht  Diirer  and  Lucas  Cranach  were 
almost  as  zealous  champions  of  the  new  ideas  as  Luther  and  Hutten, 
and  probably  few  pictures  have  had  a  greater  popular  influence  than 
Diirer's  portrayal  of  St  John  taking  precedence  of  St  Peter,  and  of 
St  Paul  as  the  protector  of  the  (xospel.  •  An  English  nobleman 
travelling  in  Germany  in  1523  was  amazed  by  the  number  of 
"abominable  pictures  "ridiculing  the  friars,  though  he  sent  to  his  King 
some  similar  specimens  satirising  Murner,  on  whom  Henry  had  bestowed 
a  hundred  pounds  for  his  attack  on  Luther  and  for  his  translation  of 
Henry's  own  book. 

The  motive  of  all  this  literature  was  as  yet  practical  rather  than 
doctrinal,  to  eradicate  the  abuses  of  the  ecclesiastical  organisation  rather 
than  to  establish  any  fresh  dogmatic  system  ;  and  the  revolutionarj^  ten- 
dencies were  strongest  in  the  middle  classes,  which  dominated  the  town 
life  in  Germany.  Though  supported  by  the  knights  the  Reformation 
was  in  the  main  a  bourgeois  movement ;  it  was  the  religious  aspect 
of  the  advent  of  the  middle  classes.  They  had  already  emancipated 
themselves  from  the  medieval  feudal  system,  and  they  had  long  been 
fretting  against  the  trammels  which  the  Church  imposed  upon  their 
individual  and  corporate  autonomy.  Clerical  immunities  from  municipal 
taxation,  episcopal  jurisdiction  over  otherwise  free  towns  produced  a 
never-ceasing  source  of  irritation.  To  these  commercial  classes  Eberlin 
of  Giinzburg's  assertions  that  the  papal  Curia  cost  Germany  three 
hundred  thousand  crowns  a  year,  and  that  the  friars  extracted  another 
million,  were  irresistible  arguments  for  the  elimination  of  papal  control 
over  the  German  Church  and  for  the  dissolution  of  the  friars'  Orders. 
This  predisposition  to  attack  the  Church  was  reinforced  by  the  lingering 


160  Spread  of  the  Reformed  doctrines  [1521-5 

remnants  of  the  Hussite  movement.  Some  members  of  that  sect  had 
settled  on  the  borders  of  Silesia  and  Moravia  in  the  middle  of  the 
fifteenth  century ;  and  they  are  claimed  as  the  founders  of  the  later 
Bohemian  Brethren.  Wimpheling  and  Pirkheimer  had  remarked  the 
recrudescence  of  the  Hussite  heresy;  and  Wolfgang  Capito  declares 
that  in  his  youth  he  had  often  heard  his  elders  read  the  writings  of  the 
Bohemian  Reformers.  Luther's  words  were  not  entirely  novel  accents, 
but  the  echoes  of  half-forgotten  sounds  repeated  with  a  novel  force. 

So  while  the  Princes  held  aloof  from  the  movement  it  progressed 
with  rapid  strides  in  the  cities.  At  Niirnberg  under  the  eyes  of  the 
national  government  the  churches  of  St  Lawrence  and  St  Sebald 
resounded  with  the  new  doctrines,  and  Osiander  under  the  protection 
of  the  city  authorities  began  to  proselytise  not  only  among  the  citizens 
but  among  the  numbers  of  public  officials,  from  clerks  to  Princes, 
who  were  brought  to  Niirnberg  by  the  business  of  the  Empire.  The 
Austrian  administration  of  Wiirttemberg  closed  its  churches  to  the 
Reformers,  but  almost  all  the  small  imperial  cities  of  Swabia  favoured 
the  Reformation.  Eberlin  of  Giinzburg  was  the  most  popular  of  the 
Swabian  preachers,  but  Hall,  Nordlingen,  Reutlingen,  Esslingen,  and 
Heilbronn  listened  to  the  precepts  of  Brenz,  Billicanus,  Alber,  Sty f el, 
and  Lachmann.  Strassburg  and  the  southern  cities  of  the  Swabian 
circle  were  powerfully  influenced  by  the  example  of  their  Swiss  neigh- 
bours ;  and  in  1524:,  the  year  in  which  Zwingli  established  control  over 
Zurich,  Bucer  and  Capito  effected  a  similar  change  in  Strassburg,  which 
had  already  shown  its  sympathies  by  committing  Murner's  works  to  the 
flames,  by  protecting  Matthew  Zell  from  the  Bishop,  and  by  exercising 
the  censorship  over  the  press  in  a  way  that  inflicted  no  hardship  on  the 
Reformers.  Elsewhere  in  Upper  Swabia  Zwiugli's  influence  was  strong ; 
his  friend  Schappfeler,  who  was  to  play  an  important  part  in  the 
Peasants'  Revolt,  preached  at  Memmingen,  and  Hummelberg  in  Ravens- 
burg,  while  the  disposition  of  Constance  had  been  proved  in  1521  by  its 
refusal  to  publish  the  Edict  of  Worms.  In  Bavaria  and  Austria  the 
Reformers  were  naturally  less  successful,  and  one  was  martyred  at 
Rattenberg.  But  Jacob  Strauss  and  Urbanus  Rhegius  preachecl  in  the 
valley  of  the  Inn,  Speratus  at  Salzburg  and  Vienna,  and  traces  of  the 
Reformed  doctrines  were  found  as  far  south  as  Tyrol. 

In  the  north  the  Reformers  were  not  less  active.  Heinrich  MoUer 
of  Zutphen,  an  Augustinian  from  the  Netherlands,  prevailed  in  Bremen 
against  its  Archbishop.  Hamburg  and  Liibeck,  Stralsund  and  Greifs- 
wald,  other  cities  of  the  Hanseatic  League,  followed  its  example. 
Bugenhagen,  the  historian  of  Pomerania,  was  also  its  evangelist.  Konigs- 
berg  became  Lutheran  under  the  auspices  of  Bishop  Polenz  of  Samland, 
and  l)eyond  the  limits  of  the  Empire  the  new  doctrines  spread  to  the 
German  colonies  at  Danzig  and  Dorpat,  Riga  and  Reval.  Hermann 
Tast  laboured  in  Schleswig,  Jurien  von  der  Dare  (Georgius  Aportanus) 


1522]  The  religious  Orders  and  Reform  161 

in  east  Friesland  ;  and  smaller  towns  in  Mecklenburg,  Oldenburg, 
Llineburg  felt  the  impulse.  Magdeburg  and  Breslau  were  in  close  com- 
munication with  Wittenberg,  and  at  Breslau  the  object  at  which  the 
reforming  cities  were  aiming  was  first  achieved  when  the  City  Council 
claimed  control  over  religious  instruction  on  the  ground  that  it  built 
and  maintained  ecclesiastical  edifices.  In  many  cities  the  result  of  the 
struggle  between  the  old  faith  and  the  new  was  indecisive  ;  at  Ulm,  for 
instance,  the  Council  determined  to  maintain  a  religious  neutrality  ; 
elsewhere  the  Catholic  clergy  retained  control  of  the  churches,  while 
Lutheran  divines  preached  to  large  audiences  in  the  open  air. 

At  first  sight  it  may  seem  strange  that  an  anti-ecclesiastical  move- 
ment should  have  been  led  by  ecclesiastics,  but  the  greatest  enemies  of  a 
class  or  order  generally  come  from  within  it  ;  the  most  successful  leaders 
of  democratic  revolutions  have  usually  been  aristocrats,  and  the  over- 
throw of  Churches  has  often  been  the  work  of  Churchmen.  So  promi- 
nent were  members  of  Luther's  own  order  in  the  agitation  against 
religious  Orders  that  the  whole  thing  was  thought  at  first  to  be  only  a 
squabble  between  Augustinians  and  Dominicans,  like  many  another 
which  had  already  broken  out  and  been  suppressed.  The  movement 
had  been  hatched  in  an  Augustinian  monastery  at  Wittenberg,  and  the 
first  to  imitate  the  Wittenberg  monks  were  their  Augustinian  brethren 
at  Erfurt.  In  1522  a  Chapter  of  the  Order  declared  monastic  vows  to 
be  no  longer  binding,  and  a  few  months  later  its  vicar  abandoned  his 
dignity  and  took  a  wife.  The  Augustinians  of  Eisleben,  Magdeburg, 
Gotha,  and  Nlirnberg  soon  followed  the  example  of  those  of  Wittenberg 
and  Erfurt,  and  left  their  cloisters  to  become  evangelical  preachers  or  to 
adopt  some  secular  trade.  Two  members  of  the  Order  were  the  pioneers 
of  Lutheranism  in  the  Netherlands,  and  two  others  were  there  its 
protomartyrs. 

The  German  Augustinians  in  fact  adopted  Luther's  cause  as  a  body  ; 
no  other  Order  followed  their  example,  but  that  of  St  Francis  produced 
at  least  as  many  leaders  of  Reform.  From  Franciscan  cloisters  came 
Myconius,  the  Reformer  of  Weimar,  who  in  after  years  travelled  to 
England  in  the  vain  hope  of  strengthening  the  Anglican  Church  in  the 
Lutheran  faith  ;  John  Eberlin  of  Giinzburg,  and  Henry  of  Kettenbach, 
who  worked  together  at  Ulm  ;  Stephen  Kempen,  the  evangelist  of 
Hamburg  ;  John  Breismann,  the  reformer  of  Kottbus  ;  Gabriel  Z willing, 
the  agitator  of  Wittenberg  ;  and  Conrad  Pellican,  who  translated  the 
Talmud  into  Latin  and  impressed  with  his  learning  the  English  Re- 
formers, Whitgift  and  Jewel,  Bradford  and  Latimer.  From  among  the 
Dominicans  there  arose  Martin  Bucer,  a  notable  name  in  the  history  of 
the  German,  the  Swiss,  and  the  English  Reformations  ;  the  Brigettines 
produced  Oecolampadius,  whose  name,  like  Bucer's,  was  familiar  on 
both  sides  of  the  English  Channel.  Otto  Brunfels  was  a  Carthusian, 
and  Ambrose  Blarer  a  Benedictine.     The  Carmelite  house  at  Augsburg 

C.    M.    H.    II.  11 


1G2  Theological  controversy  increases  [1522 

was  a  Lutheran  seminary,  and  Bugenhagen,  the  Apostle  of  northern 
Germany,  had  been  Rector  of  the  Premonstratensian  school  at  Treptow. 

From  the  ranks  of  the  secular  priesthood  there  came  few  Reformers 
of  eminence,  a  circumstance  which  shows  that  even  in  their  worst  days 
the  monastic  Orders  attracted  most  of  the  promising  youth.  George  von 
Polenz  was  the  only  Bishop  who  openly  espoused  the  Lutheran  cause  in 
its  early  years,  though  the  Bishops  of  Basel  and  Breslau,  Bamberg  and 
Merseburg  were  more  or  less  friendly.  The  halting  attitude  of  the 
Archbishop  of  ^Nlainz  was  due  partly  to  fear  and  partly  to  the  design  he 
cherished  of  folloAving  the  example  of  Albrecht  of  Brandenburg  and 
converting  his  clerical  j)rincipality  into  a  secular  fief. 

But  tlie  movement,  although  led  by  Churchmen,  was  not  the  work 
of  the  Church  or  of  any  other  organisation.  It  was  a  well-nigh  universal 
spontaneous  ebullition  of  lay  and  clerical  discontent  with  the  social, 
political,  and  moral  condition  of  the  established  Catholic  Church. 
There  was  no  one  to  organise  and  guide  this  volume  of  passion,  for 
Luther,  although  the  mightiest  voice  that  ever  spoke  the  German 
language,  was  vox  et  praeterea  nihil.  He  had  none  of  the  practical 
genius  which  characterised  Calvin  or  Loyola  ;  and  the  lack  of  statesman- 
like direction  caused  the  Reforming  impulse  to  break  in  vain  against 
many  of  the  Catholic  strongholds  in  Germany.  Where  it  succeeded,  it 
owed  its  success  mainly  to  the  fact  that  its  control  fell  into  the  hands  of 
a  middle-class  laity  which  had  already  learnt  to  administer  such  compre- 
hensive affairs  as  those  of  the  Hanseatic  League.  This  participation  of 
the  laity  made  the  towns  the  bulwark  of  the  German  Reformed  faith, 
and  the  value  of  their  co-operation  was  theologically  expressed  by  the 
enunciation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  universal  priesthood  of  man  against  the 
exclusive  claims  of  the  Church.  Indeed  not  only  were  all  men  priests,  but 
women  as  well — so  declared  Matthew  Zell,  in  grateful  recognition  of  the 
effective  aid  which  women  occasionally  rendered  to  the  cause  of  Reform. 

That  cause  had  until  1522  been  identified  with  the  attempt  to 
remedy  those  national  grievances  against  worldly  priests,  high-handed 
prelates,  and  a  corrupt  Italian  Papacy,  which  had  been  variously  ex- 
pressed in  the  list  of  gravamina  drawn  up  by  the  Diet  of  Worms  and  in 
the  furious  diatribes  of  popular  literature.  But  gradually  and  almost 
imperceptibly  this  campaign  assumed  a  theological  aspect  ;  Luther  and 
his  colleagues  began  to  seek  a  speculative  basis  for  their  practical 
propaganda,  and  to  trace  the  evil  customs  of  the  time  to  a  polluted 
doctrinal  source.  Religion  in  that  theological  age  consisted  largely  in 
belief  and  very  slightly  in  conduct,  and  the  conversion  of  a  movement  for 
practical  reform  into  a  war  of  creeds  was  inevitable.  But  it  hindered 
the  practical  Reformation  and  helped  to  destroy  the  national  unity  of 
Germany.  There  was  scarcely  a  conservative  who  did  not  see  and  admit 
the  need  for  a  purification  of  the  Church  ;  Murner  and  Eck  and.  most 
notably,  Erasmus  felt  it  as  much  as  Luther,  Melanchthon,  and  Hutten  ; 


1521-2]  Activity  of  Luther  163 

and  Duke  George  of  Saxony  and  Charles  V  as  much  as  the  Elector 
Frederick.  But  there  was  a  vast  difference  between  such  a  recognition 
and  the  acknowledgement  of  Luther's  doctrine  of  the  unfree  will, 
between  the  admission  that  the  theory  of  good  works  had  been  grossl}* 
abused  and  the  assertion  that  all  good  works  were  vain.  The  division 
thus  initiated  was  deep  and  permanent,  and  whereas  the  practical  aims 
of  the  Reformation  have  commanded  a  universal  assent  in  theory  and 
an  ever-widening  assent  in  practice.  Luther's  theology  commanded  only 
a  sectional  allegiance  even  among  Reformers  of,  his  century  and  a 
decreasing  allegiance  in  subsequent  generations. 

But  Luther  in  spite  of  his  repudiation  of  scholastic  theology  never 
got  rid  of  the  results  of  his  scholastic  training  ;  he  must  have  a  complete 
and  logical  theory  of  the  universe,  and  he  sought  it  in  the  works  of  the 
great  Father  of  the  Church  on  whose  precepts  Luther's  own  Order  had 
been  professedly  founded.  St  Augustine's  views  on  the  impotence  of  the 
human  will  had  been  adopted  by  the  Church  in  preference  to  those  of 
his  antagonist  Pelagius  ;  but  in  practice  their  rigour  had  been  mitigated 
by  a  host  of  beneficent  dispensations  invented  to  shield  mankind  from 
the  inevitable  effects  of  its  helplessness  in  the  face  of  original  sin.  These 
medieval  accretions  Luther  swept  away;  he  accepted  with  all  its  appalling 
consequences  the  doctrine  of  predestination  and  of  the  tliraldom  of 
mankind  to  sin,  and  did  not  hesitate  to  make  God  directly  responsible 
for  the  evil  as  well  as  the  good  existing  in  the  world.  It  is  a  singular 
phenomenon  that  a  fervent  belief  in  the  impotence  of  the  human  will 
should  have  stimulated  one  of  the  most  masterful  wills  which  ever 
affected  the  destinies  of  mankind. 

The  evolution  of  this  doctrine  had  been  but  one  of  the  mental 
activities  which  occupied  Luther  during  his  enforced  seclusion  at  the 
castle  of  Wartburg.  His  abduction  had  been  preconcerted  between 
himself  and  his  friends  at  the  Elector  Frederick's  Court  on  the  eve  of 
his  departure  from  "Worms ;  and  the  secret  was  so  well  kept  that  his 
followers  commonly  thought  that  he  had  been  murdered  by  papal 
emissaries.  Here  in  his  solitude  he  was  subjected  to  a  repetition  of 
those  assaults  of  the  devil  which  he  had  experienced  in  the  Augustinian 
cloister.  WTiat  assurance  had  he  that  he  was  right  and  the  rest  of 
the  Church  was  wrong?  But  the  faith  that  was  in  him  saved  him 
from  his  doubts  of  himself,  and  hard  work  prevented  him  from  be- 
coming a  visionary.  The  news  that  Archbishop  Albrecht  of  Mainz 
was  intent  on  a  fresh  recourse  to  Indulgences  provoked  a  remarkable 
illustration  of  Luther's  influence ;  in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  well-wishers 
at  the  Saxon  Court  to  keep  him  quiet,  he  presented  an  ultimatum  to 
the  Archbishop  granting  a  respite  of  fourteen  days  within  which 
Albrecht  might  retract  and  escape  the  perils  of  the  Reformer's  fulmi- 
nations.     The  Primate  of  Germany  replied  with  an  abject  submission. 

It  was  difficult  to  silence  a  man  who  wielded  such  an  authority, 


16J:  Luther  s  attitude  toivards  the  Scriptures      [1522-34 

and  commentaries  on  the  Psalms  and  the  Magnificat,  sermons  on  the 
Gospels  and  Epistles  for  the  year,  a  book  on  Confession,  and  an 
elaborate  treatise  condemning  the  validity  of  monastic  vows,  flowed 
with  amazing  rapidity  from  his  pen.  More  important  was  his  trans- 
lation of  the  New  Testament,  on  which  he  was  engaged  during  the 
greater  part  of  his  captivity.  The  old  error  that  versions  of  the 
Scriptures  in  the  vernacular  tongues  were  almost  unknown  before  the 
Reformation  has  been  often  exposed,  but  it  is  not  so  often  pointed 
out  that  these  earlier  translations  were  based  on  the  Vulgate  and  thus 
reflected  the  misconceptions  of  the  Church  against  which  the  Reformers 
protested.  It  was  almost  as  important  that  translations  into  the  ver- 
nacular should  be  based  on  original  texts  as  that  there  should  be 
translations  at  all,  and  from  a  critical  point  of  view  the  chief  merit 
of  Luther's  version  is  that  he  sought  to  embody  in  it  the  best  results 
of  Greek  and  Hebrew  scholarship.  But  its  success  was  due  not  so 
much  to  the  soundness  of  its  scholarship  as  to  the  literary  form  of 
the  translation,  and  Luther's  Bible  is  as  much  a  classic  as  the  English 
Authorized  Version.  If  he  did  not  create  the  NeuJioehdeutsch  which 
Grimm  calls  the  "  Protestant  dialect,"  he  first  gave  it  extensive  popular 
currency,  and  the  language  of  his  version,  which  was  based  on  the  Saxon 
Kanzleisprache,  superseded  alike  the  old  HochdeutscJi  and  Plattdeutsch, 
which  were  then  the  prevalent  German  dialects.  The  first  edition  of 
the  New  Testament  was  issued  in  September,  1522,  and  a  second  two 
months  later  ;  the  whole  Bible  was  completed  in  1534,  and  in  spite 
of  the  facts  that  a  Basel  printer  translated  Luther's  "outlandish 
words "  into  South  German  and  that  a  Plattdeutsch  version  was  also 
published,  the  victory  of  Luther's  dialect  w^as  soon  assured. 

Luther's  Bible  became  the  most  effective  weapon  in  the  armoury 
of  the  German  Reformers,  and  to  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  they 
and  later  Protestants  opposed  the  infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture.  But 
this  was  a  claim  which  Luther  himself  never  asserted  for  the  Bible, 
and  still  less  for  his  own  translation.  His  often-quoted  remark  that 
the  Epistle  of  St  James  was  an  "  epistle  of  straw,"  should  not  be 
separated  from  Luther's  own  qualification  that  it  was  such  only  in 
comparison  with  the  Gospel  of  St  John,  the  Pauline  Epistles,  and  some 
other  books  of  the  New  Testament.  But  his  references  to  that  Epistle 
and  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the  Book  of  Revelation  show  a 
very  independent  attitude  towards  the  Scriptures.  Wherever  the  words 
of  the  Canonical  Books  seemed  to  conflict  with  those  of  Christ,  he 
preferred  the  latter  as  an  authority,  and  further  difliculties  he  left  to 
individual  interpretation.  Let  each  man,  he  writes,  hold  to  wdiat  his  spirit 
yields  hira  ;  and  he  confessed  that  he  could  not  reconcile  himself  to 
the  Book  of  Revelation.  He  was  in  fact  supremely  eclectic  in  respect  to 
the  Scriptures  and  to  the  doctrines  he  deduced  from  them  ;  he  gave  the 
greatest  weight  to  those  Books  and  to  those  passages  which  appealed 


I52i]  Carlstadt  and  Zivilling  165 

most  strongly  to  liis  own  individuality,  while  he  neglected  those  which, 
like  St  James'  Epistle,  did  not  suit  his  doctrines.  But  he  could  hardly 
refuse  a  like  liberty  to  others,  and  was  thus  soon  involved  in  a  struggle 
with  Reformers  who  like  himself  started  from  the  denial  of  the  authority 
of  the  Roman  Church,  but  pressed  further  than  he  did  his  own  arguments 
on  the  freedom  of  the  will  and  the  weight  attaching  to  Scripture. 

Luther's  seclusion  at  the  Wartburg  did  not  allay  the  intellectual 
ferment  at  Wittenberg  or  impair  the  influence  it  exercised  over  the 
rest  of  Germany.  At  Wittenberg  both  the  University  and  the  town 
defied  alike  the  papal  Bull  and  the  imperial  Edict.  Scholars  flocked 
to  the  University  from  all  quarters,  and  it  became  the  metropolis  of 
the  reforming  movement.  Melanchthon  forsook  the  Clouds  of  Aristo- 
phanes to  devote  himself  to  the  Epistles  of  St  Paul ;  and  his  Loci 
Communes  formed  one  of  the  most  effective  of  Lutheran  handbooks.  But 
he  lacked  the  force  and  decision  of  character  to  lead  or  control  the 
revolutionary  tendencies  which  were  gathering  strength,  and  Luther's 
place  was  taken  by  his  old  ally  Carlstadt.  Carlstadt's  was  one  of  those 
acute  intellects  which  earn  for  their  j^ossessors  the  reputation  of  being 
reckless  agitators  because  they  are  too  far  in  advance  of  their  age ; 
and  the  doubts  which  he  entertained  of  the  Mosaic  authorshij)  of  the 
Pentateuch  and  of  the  identity  of  the  Gospels,  as  they  then  existed,  with 
their  original  form,  were  considered  to  be  evidence  of  the  instability  of 
his  character  rather  than  of  the  soundness  of  his  reasoning  faculties. 
He  was  not,  however,  free  from  personal  vanity  or  jealousy  of  Luther, 
and  his  rival's  absence  afforded  him  the  opportunity  of  appearing  as 
the  leader  of  the  movement.  Declining  an  invitation  from  Christian  II 
to  Denmark,  he  united  with  Gabriel  Zwilling  in  an  attempt  to  destroy 
what  Luther  had  left  of  the  papal  system.  He  attacked  clerical  celibacy 
in  a  voluminous  treatise,  demanding  that  marriage  should  be  made  com- 
pulsory for  secular  priests  and  optional  for  monastics.  He  denounced 
the  whole  institution  of  monachism,  and  pronounced  the  adoration  of 
the  Eucharist  and  private  masses  to  be  sinful.  On  December  3,  1521, 
there  was  a  riot  against  the  Mass,  and  the  University  demanded  its 
abolition  throughout  the  country.  The  Town  Council  refused  its  con- 
currence in  this  request,  but  on  Christmas-Day  Carlstadt  administered 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  in  both  elements,  omitting  the  preparatory 
confession,  the  elevation  of  the  Host,  and  the  "abominable  canon," 
which  implied  that  the  celebration  was  a  sacrifice.  Zwilling  next 
inveighed  against  the  viaticum  and  extreme  unction  as  being  a  financial 
trick  on  the  part  of  the  priests,  and  entered  upon  an  iconoclastic 
campaign,  inviting  his  hearers  to  burn  the  pictures  in  churches  and  to 
destroy  the  altars. 

Reminiscences  of  Hussite  doctrine  may  have  predisposed  the  Saxon 
population  living  on  the  borders  of  Bohemia  in  favour  of  Carlstadt's 
proceedings,  and  he  was  now  reinforced  by  the  influx  from  Zwickau  of 


166  The  Anabaptists  [i52i- 


Nicolaus  Storch,  Thomas  Miinzer,  Marcus  Stiibner,  and  their  followers, 
whose  views  were  of  a  distinctively  Hussite,  or  rather  Taborite,  tendency. 
These  prophets  believed  themselves  to  be  under  the  direct  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  their  immediate  intercourse  with  the  source  of  all 
truth  rendered  them  independent  of  any  other  guidance,  even  that 
of  the  Scriptures.  The  free  interpretation  of  the  Bible  which  seemed 
a  priceless  boon  to  Luther,  was  a  poor  thing  to  men  who  believed 
themselves  to  be  at  least  as  much  inspired  as  its  writers.  From  their 
repudiation  of  infant  baptism,  on  the  grounds  that  a  sacrament  was  void 
without  faith,  and  that  infants  could  not  have  faith,  they  were  after- 
wards called  Anabaptists,  but  they  also  held  the  tenets  of  the  later  Fifth 
Monarchy  men  in  England.  Like  Luther  they  believed  in  the  unfree 
will,  but  they  carried  the  doctrine  to  greater  lengths,  and  unlike  him 
they  found  inspiration  in  the  Apocalypse.  They  asserted  the  imminence 
of  a  bloody  purification  of  the  Church,  and  they  endeavoured  to  verify 
their  prophecy  by  beginning  with  the  slaughter  of  their  opponents  at 
Zwickau.  The  plot  was,  however,  discovered,  and  Storch,  Miinzer,  and 
Stiibner  fled  to  Wittenberg. 

Here  they  joined  hands  with  Carlstadt  and  Zwilling.  Even 
Melanchthon  was  impressed  by  their  arguments,  and  the  Elector 
Frederick,  mindful  of  Gamaliel's  advice,  refused  to  move  against  them. 
Early  in  1522  iconoclastic  riots  broke  out ;  priestly  garments  and 
auricular  confession  were  disused  ;  the  abolition  of  the  mendicant  Orders 
was  demanded,  together  with  the  distribution  of  the  property  of  the  reli- 
gious corporations  among  the  poor.  The  influence  of  Taborite  dogma 
was  shown  by  the  agitation  for  closing  all  places  of  amusement  and  the 
denunciation  of  schools,  universities,  and  all  forms  of  learning  as 
superfluous  in  a  generation  directly  informed  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  The 
Wittenberg  schoolmaster,  Mohr,  himself  besought  parents  to  remove 
their  children  from  school ;  students  began  to  desert  the  University, 
and  the  New  Learning  seemed  doomed  to  end  in  the  domination 
of  fanatical  ignorance  based  on  the  brute  force  of  the  mob. 

In  the  Edict  of  Worms  Luther  had  been  branded  rather  as  a 
revolutionary  than  as  a  heretic,  and  the  burden  of  the  complaints  pre- 
ferred against  him  by  the  Catholic  humanists  was  that  his  methods  of 
seeking  a  reformation  would  be  fatal  to  all  order,  political  or  ecclesiasti- 
cal. They  painted  him  as  the  apostle  of  revolution,  a  second  Catiline  ; 
and  the  excesses  at  Wittenberg  might  well  make  them  think  themselves 
prophets.  The  moment  was  a  crucial  one ;  it  was  to  decide  whether 
or  not  the  German  Reformation  was  to  follow  the  usual  course  of 
revolutions,  devour  its  own  children,  and  go  on  adopting  ever  extremer 
views  till  the  day  of  reaction  came.  Of  all  the  elements  in  revolt  from 
Rome,  Luther  and  his  school  were  the  most  conservative,  and  upon  the 
question  whether  he  would  prevail  against  the  extreme  faction  depended 
the  success  or  failure  of  the  German  Reformation. 


1522]  Luther  returns  to  Wittenberg  167 

The  initial  proceedings  of  Carlstadt  had  vexed  Luther's  soul,  but  he 
was  violently  antif)athetic  to  the  Zwickau  enthusiasts.  He  vehemently 
repudiated  their  appeal  to  force  in  order  to  regenerate  the  Church.  He 
recalled  the  fact  that  by  spiritual  methods  alone  he  had  routed  Tetzel 
and  his  minions  and  defied  with  impunity  both  Emperor  and  Pope.  He 
probably  foresaw  that  the  Reformation  would  be  ruined  by  its  association 
with  the  crude  social  democracy  of  Miinzer  and  Storch,  but  in  any  case 
his  personal  instincts  would  alone  have  been  sufficient  to  make  him 
hostile ;  and  when  he  had  made  up  his  mind  to  a  course,  no  consider- 
ations of  prudence  or  of  his  own  safety  could  deter  him  from  pursuing  it. 
Braving  the  ban  of  the  Empire  and  disregarding  the  Elector's  stringent 
commands  he  left  the  Wartburg  and  reappeared  at  Wittenberg  on 
March  6,  1522.  His  action  required  at  least  as  much  courage  as  his 
journey  to  Worms,  and  the  demonstration  of  his  influence  was  far  more 
striking.  In  a  course  of  eight  sermons  he  rallied  almost  the  whole  of 
the  town  to  his  side.  Zwilling  confessed  his  errors  ;  Carlstadt,  Miinzer, 
and  Stiibner  soon  departed  to  labour  in  other  fields,  and  most  of  the 
work  of  destruction  was  repaired.  Luther  himself  retained  his  cowl  and 
lived  in  the  Augustinian  monastery,  and  scope  was  afforded  for  every 
man's  scruples  regarding  the  Mass  ;  in  one  church  it  was  celebrated  with 
all  the  old  Catholic  rites,  in  another  the  Eucharist  was  administered  in 
one  or  in  both  forms  according  to  individual  taste,  and  in  a  third  the 
bread  and  the  wine  were  always  given  to  the  laity. 

Luther  had  vindicated  the  conservative  character  of  the  Reformation 
as  he  conceived  it ;  he  had  checked  the  swing  of  the  pendulum  in  one 
direction,  and  had  thereby  moderated  the  force  of  its  recoil ;  but  he  could 
not  prevent  it  from  swinging  back  altogether.  It  had  gone  too  far  for 
that  under  the  impetus  supplied  by  himself,  and  a  reaction  based  upon 
real  conviction  was  slowly  developing  itself  and  coming  to  the  rescue  of 
the  storm-tossed  Catholic  Church.  The  first  force  to  react  under  the 
antagonism  produced  by  the  rejection  of  Catholic  dogma  was  the 
humanist  movement.  The  body  was  shattered,  and  some  of  its  members 
joined  the  doctrinal  Reformers ;  but  the  majority,  including  the  great 
leader  of  the  movement,  took  up  a  more  and  more  hostile  position. 
When  Luther  was  thought  to  have  been  killed,  many  turned  to  Erasmus 
as  Luther's  successor.  "  Give  ear,  thou  knight-errant  of  Christ,"  wrote 
Diirer,  "  ride  on  by  the  Lord  Christ's  side  ;  defend  the  truth,  reach  forth 
to  the  martyr's  crown."  But  that  was  a  crown  which  Erasmus  never 
desired ;  still  less  would  he  seek  it  in  a  cause  which  threatened  to  ruin 
his  most  cherished  designs.  Theology,  he  complained,  bade  fair  to  absorb 
all  the  humanities;  and  the  theology  of  Luther  was  as  hateful  to  him  as 
that  of  Louvain.  The  dogmas,  which  appealed  to  men  of  the  iron  cast 
of  Luther  and  Calvin,  repelled  cultured  men  of  the  world  like  Erasmus  ; 
for  scholars  and  artists  are  essentiall}'  aristocratic  in  temperament  and 
firmly  attached  to  that  doctrine  of  individual  merit  which  Luther  and 


168     Breach  between  the  Reformers  and  the  humanists 

Calvin  denied.  While  Luther  adopted  the  teaching  of  St  Augustine, 
Erasmus  was  regarded  at  Wittenberg  as  little  better  than  a  Pelagian, 
and  his  personal  conflict  with  Hutten  was  soon  followed  by  a  more 
important  encounter  with  Luther.  Urged  by  Catholics  to  attack  the 
new  theology,  Erasmus  with  intuitive  skill  selected  the  doctrine  of  free 
will,  which  he  asserted  in  a  treatise  of  great  moderation.  Luther's  reply 
was  remarkable  for  the  unflinching  way  in  which  he  accepted  the  logical 
consequences  of  his  favourite  dogma.  But  that  did  not  make  it  more 
palatable,  and  Erasmus'  book  confirmed  not  a  few  in  their  antipathy  to 
the  Lutheran  cause. 

These  were  by  no  means  blind  partisans  of  the  Papacy.  Murner, 
the  scholar  and  poet ;  Jerome  Emser,  the  secretary  to  Duke  George  of 
Saxony ;  Cochlaeus,  Heynlin  von  Stein,  Alexander  Hegius,  Luther's 
old  master  Staupitz,  Karl  von  Miltitz,  Johann  Faber,  Pirkheimer,  and 
many  another  had  long  desired  a  reformation  of  the  Church,  but  they 
looked  to  a  General  Council  and  legal  methods.  Revolution  and  dis- 
ruption they  considered  too  great  a  price  to  pay  for  reform,  and  therefore 
sadly  threw  in  their  lot  with  the  forces  which  were  preparing  to  do 
battle  for  the  Catholic  Church,  purified  or  corrupt.  Slowly  also  a 
section  of  the  German  laity  began  to  range  itself  on  the  same  side,  and 
from  the  confused  melee  of  public  opinion  two  organised  parties  gradu- 
ally emerged.  Here  and  there  this  or  that  form  of  religious  belief  ob- 
tained a  decisive  predominance  and  began  to  control  the  organisation  of 
a  city  or  principality  in  the  interests  of  one  or  the  other  party.  An 
infinity  of  local  circumstances  contributed  to  each  local  decision; 
dynastic  conditions  might  assist  a  Prince  to  determine  with  M'hich 
religious  party  to  side,  and  relations  with  a  neighbouring  Bishop  or 
even  trading  interests  might  exert  a  similar  influence  over  the  corporate 
conscience  of  cities.  But  with  regard  to  Germany  as  a  whole,  and 
with  a  few  significant  exceptions,  the  frontiers  of  the  Latin  Church 
ultimately  coincided  to  a  remarkable  extent  with  those  of  the  old 
Roman  Empire.  Where  the  legions  of  the  Caesars  had  planted  their 
standards  and  founded  their  colonies,  where  the  Latin  speech  and  Latin 
civilisation  had  permeated  the  people,  there  in  the  sixteenth  century  the 
Roman  Church  retained  its  hold.  The  limits  of  the  Roman  Empire  are 
in  the  main  the  boundaries  between  Teutonic  and  Latin  Christianity. 

But  Latin  Christianity  saved  itself  in  southern  Germany  only  by 
borrowing  some  of  the  weapons  of  the  original  opponents  of  Rome,  and 
the  Counter-Reformation  owed  its  success  to  its  adoption  of  many  of  the 
practical  proposals  and  some  of  the  doctrinal  ideas  of  the  Reformation. 
The  confiscation  of  Church  property  and  the  limitation  of  clerical 
prerogative  went  on  apace  in  Catholic  as  well  as  in  Protestant  countries, 
and,  while  the  spiritual  prerogatives  of  the  Papacy  were  magnified  at 
the  Council  of  Trent,  its  practical  power  declined.  It  secured  secular 
aid  by  making  concessions  to  the  secular  power.     The  earliest  example 


1521-5]  Concessions  to  the  Secular  Poivers  169 

of  this  process  was  seen  in  Bavaria.  Originally  Bavaria  had  been  as 
hostile  to  the  Cliurch  as  any  other  part  of  Germany,  and  no  attempt 
was  there  made  to  execute  the  Edict  of  Worms.  But  what  others 
sought  by  hostility  to  the  Papacy,  the  Dukes  of  Bavaria  won  by  its 
conciliation,  and  between  1521  and  1525  a  firm  alliance  was  built 
up  between  the  Pope  and  the  Dukes  on  the  basis  of  papal  support 
for  the  Dukes  even  against  their  Bishops.  Adrian  VI  granted  them 
a  fifth  of  all  ecclesiastical  revenues  within  their  dominions,  a  source 
of  income  which  henceforth  remained  one  of  the  chief  pillars  of  the 
Bavarian  financial  system  ;  and  another  Bull  empowered  the  temporal 
tribunals  to  deal  with  heretics  without  the  concurrence  of  the  Bavarian 
Bishops,  who  resented  the  ducal  intrusion  into  their  jurisdictions.  The 
territorial  ambition  of  the  Dukes  was  thus  gratified  ;  and  the  grievances 
of  the  laity  against  the  Cliurch  were  to  some  extent  satisfied  by  the 
adoption  of  measures  intended  to  reform  clerical  morals  ;  and  they  both 
were  thus  inclined  to  defend  Catholic  dogma  against  Lutheran  heresy. 
A  similar  grant  of  Church  revenues  to  the  Archduke  Ferdinand  for  use 
against  the  Turk  facilitated  a  like  result ;  and  Austria  and  Bavaria 
became  the  bulwarks  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  Germany.  Other 
Catholic  Princes,  like  Duke  George  of  Saxony,  maintained  the  faith 
with  more  disinterested  motives  but  with  less  permanent  success  ;  while 
the  ecclesiastical  Electors  of  Mainz,  Trier,  and  Cologne,  were  prevented 
by  Lutheran  sympathies  in  the  chapters  or  in  the  cities  of  their  dioceses 
from  playing  the  vigorous  part  in  opposition  to  the  national  movement 
which  might  otherwise  have  been  expected  from  them. 

A  like  process  of  crystallisation  pervaded  the  Reforming  party.  In 
1524  Luther  effected  the  final  conversion  of  the  Elector  Frederick  of 
Saxony,  and  his  brother  John  who  succeeded  him  in  the  following  year 
was  already  a  Lutheran.  In  the  same  year  the  youthful  and  warlike 
Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse  was  won  over  by  Melanchthon  and  enjoined 
the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  throughout  his  territories.  Margrave 
Casimir  of  Brandenburg  took  a  similarly  decisive  step  in  concurrence 
with  his  Estates  at  Bayreuth  in  October.  The  banished  Duke  Ulrich  of 
Wiirttemberg  was  also  a  convert,  and  Duke  Ernest  of  Liineburg,  a 
nephew  of  the  Elector  Frederick,  began  a  reformation  at  Celle  in  1524. 
Charles  V's  sister  Isabella  listened  to  Osiander's  exhortations  atNlirnberg 
and  adopted  the  new  ideas,  and  her  husband,  Christian  II  of  Denmark, 
invited  Luther  and  Carlstadt  to  preach  in  his  kingdom.  He  was  soon 
deprived  of  his  throne,  but  his  successor  Frederick  I  adopted  a  similar 
religious  attitude  and  promoted  the  spread  of  reforming  principles  in 
Denmark  and  in  his  duchies  of  Schleswig  and  Holstein.  The  Grand- 
master of  the  Teutonic  Order,  Albrecht  of  Brandenburg,  had  also  been 
influenced  by  Osiander,  and,  turning  his  new  faith  to  practical  account, 
he  converted  the  possessions  of  the  Order  into  the  hereditary  duchy  of 
Prussia,  a  fief  of  the  Polish  Crown,  which  received  at  once  a  purified 


170     The  Niirnherg  Diets  and  the  Papal  Nuncios     [i523^ 

religion  and  a  new  constitution.  In  the  neighbouring  duchy  of 
Pomerania  the  Catholic  Bogislav  X  was  succeeded  in  1523  by  his  two 
sons  George  and  Barnim,  of  whom  the  latter  was  a  Lutheran. 

The  feeble  government  established  at  the  Diet  of  Worms  in  1521 
was  quite  unable  to  control  this  growing  cleavage  of  the  nation  into 
two  religious  parties ;  but  it  made  some  efforts  to  steer  a  middle  course 
and  it  reflected  with  some  fidelity  the  national  hostility  to  the  papal 
Curia.  It  had  met  the  Diet  for  the  first  time  in  February,  1522,  and  it 
entertained  some  hopes  that  the  new  Pope,  Adrian  VI,  would  do  some- 
thing to  meet  the  long  list  of  gravamina  which  had  been  drawn  up  in 
the  previous  year  and  sent  to  Rome  for  consideration  ;  but  it  was  late 
in  the  summer  before  Adrian  reached  the  Vatican,  and  his  policy  could 
not  be  announced  to  the  Diet  until  its  next  meeting  in  November.  The 
papal  Nuncio  was  Francesco  Chieregati,  an  experienced  diplomatist,  and 
he  came  with  a  conciliatory  message.  He  said  nothing  about  Luther 
in  his  first  speech  to  the  Diet,  and  in  an  interview  with  Planitz,  the 
Elector  Frederick's  Chancellor,  he  admitted  the  existence  of  grave  abuses 
in  the  Papacy,  and  the  partial  responsibility  of  Leo  X  for  them  ;  nor 
did  he  deny  that  Luther  had  done  good  work  in  bringing  these  abuses 
to  light ;  though  of  course  the  monk's  attacks  on  the  sacraments,  on  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  and  on  Councils  could  not  be  tolerated.  But 
this  peaceful  atmosphere  did  not  endure.  Adrian  seems  to  have  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  his  instructions  to  Chieregati  did  not  lay  sufficient 
emphasis  on  papal  dignity,  and  a  brief  which  he  addressed  to  his 
Nuncio  on  November  25  was  much  more  minatory.  His  threats  were 
conveyed  to  the  Diet  by  Chieregati's  speech  on  January  3,  1523  ;  Luther 
was  denounced  as  worse  than  the  Turk,  and  was  accused  of  not  merely 
polluting  Germany  with  his  heresy  but  of  aiming  at  the  destruction  of 
all  order  and  property.  The  Estates  were  reminded  of  the  end  of 
Dathan  and  Abiram,  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  of  Jerome  and  Hus  ; 
if  they  separated  themselves  from  God's  Holy  Church  they  might  incur 
a  similar  fate. 

Yet  the  Pope  did  not  deny  the  abuses  of  which  complaint  had  been 
made,  and  his  frank  acknowledgement  of  them  supplied  the  Diet  with 
a  cue  for  their  answer.  They  refused  the  Nuncio's  demand  that  the 
Lutheran  preachers  of  Niirnberg  should  be  seized  and  sent  to  Rome,  and 
appointed  a  committee  to  deal  with  the  question.  This  body  reported 
that  the  Pope's  acknowledgement  of  the  existence  of  abuses  made  it 
impossible  to  proceed  against  Luther  for  pointing  them  out  ;  and  it 
carried  war  into  the  enemy's  territory  by  demanding  that  the  Pope 
should  surrender  German  annates  to  be  appropriated  to  German 
nationtd  purposes,  and  summon  a  Council,  in  which  the  laity  were  to 
be  represented,  to  sit  in  some  German  town  and  deal  with  the  ecclesi- 
astical situation.  This  report  met  with  some  opposition  from  the 
Elector  Joachim  of  Brandenburg,  Duke  George  of  Saxony,  and  the 


1523-4]      The  Niirnherg  Diets  and  the  Pcqml  Nuncios     171 

Archduke  Ferdinand ;  but  the  modifications  adopted  by  the  Diet  did 
not  seriously  alter  its  import.  The  Elector  Frederick  was  to  be  asked 
to  restrain  Luther,  but  probably  no  one  anticipated  that  his  efforts,  if 
he  made  any,  would  be  successful ;  no  steps  were  to  be  taken  to  execute 
the  Edict  of  Worms  or  to  silence  the  Reformers ;  the  Diet  reiterated 
its  hundred  gravamina,  and,  although  no  approbation  was  expressed  of 
Luther  and  his  cause,  the  outlawed  monk  had  as  much  reason  to  be 
pleased  with  the  results  of  the  Diet  as  Chieregati  had  to  be  discontented. 

Before  the  Diet  assembled  again  the  reforming  Adrian  had  gone  the 
way  of  his  predecessors,  and  popular  feeling  at  Rome  towards  reform 
was  expressed  by  the  legend  inscribed  on  the  door  of  the  dead  Pope's 
physician  Liheratori  patriae.  Another  Medici  sat  on  the  throne  of 
Leo  X,  and  religious  reform  was  exchanged  for  family  politics.  But 
even  Clement  VII  felt  the  necessity  of  grappling  with  the  German 
jDroblem,  and  Lorenzo  Campeggio  was  sent  to  the  Diet  which  again  met 
at  Niirnberg  in  January,  1524.  As  he  entered  Augsburg  and  gave  his 
benediction  to  the  crowd,  he  was  met  with  jeers  and  insults.  At  Niirn- 
berg, which  he  reached  on  March  16,  the  Princes  advised  him  to  make 
a  private  entry  for  fear  of  hostile  demonstrations,  and  on  Maundy 
Thursday  under  his  very  eyes  three  thousand  people,  including  the 
Emperor's  sister,  received  the  communion  in  both  forms.  His  mission 
seemed  a  forlorn  hope,  but  there  were  a  few  breaks  in  the  gloom.  The 
Meichsregiment,  which  had  on  the  whole  been  more  advanced  in  religious 
opinion  than  the  Diets,  had  lost  the  respect  of  the  people.  The  repudi- 
ation of  its  authority  by  the  towns,  the  knights,  and  several  of  the 
Princes,  with  the  encouragement  of  the  Emperor,  indicated  the  speedy 
removal  of  this  shield  of  Lutheranism,  and  the  vote  of  censure  carried 
against  the  government  seemed  to  open  the  door  to  reaction. 

Campeggio  accordingly  again  demanded  the  execution  of  the  Edict 
of  Worms,  and  he  was  supported  by  Charles  V's  Chancellor,  Hannart, 
who  had  been  sent  from  Spain  to  aid  the  cities  in  their  resistance  to 
the  financial  proposals  of  the  Reichsregiment.  But  the  cities,  in  spite 
of  their  repudiation  of  Lutheranism  in  Spain,  were  now  indignant  at 
the  idea  of  enforcing  the  Edict  of  Worms,  and  the  Diet  itself  was  angry 
because  Campeggio  brought  no  other  answer  to  its  repeated  complaints 
than  the  statement  that  the  Holy  Father  could  not  believe  such  a 
document  to  be  the  work  of  the  Estates  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire. 
So  the  old  struggle  was  fought  over  again,  and  the  inevitable  compro- 
mise differed  only  in  shades  of  meaning  from  that  of  the  previous  year. 
The  Edict  should,  indeed,  be  executed  "  as  well  as  they  were  able,  and 
as  far  as  was  possible  "  ;  but  the  Estates  did  not  profess  any  greater 
ability  than  before.  A  General  Council  was  again  demanded,  and  pend- 
ing its  not  very  probable  or  speedy  assemblage,  a  national  Synod  was 
to  be  summoned  to  meet  at  Speier  in  November,  and  there  make  an 
interim  settlement  of  all  the  practical  and  doctrinal  questions  at  issue. 


172  Demand  for  a  General  Council  [l524 

The  prospect  of  such  a  meeting  ahxrmed  both  Pope  and  Emperor 
more  than  all  the  demands  for  a  General  Council ;  for  in  a  General 
Council  the  Germans  would  be  a  minority,  and  General  Councils 
afforded  unlimited  scope  for  delay.  But  a  German  Synod  would  mean 
business,  and  its  business  was  not  likely  to  please  either  Clement  or 
Charles.  It  would  probably  organise  a  German  national  Church  with 
slight  dependence  on  Rome ;  it  might  establish  a  national  government 
with  no  more  dependence  on  Charles.  Both  these  threatened  interests 
took  action  ;  the  Pope  instigated  Henry  VIII  to  take  away  from  the 
German  merchants  of  the  Steelyard  their  commercial  privileges,  and  to 
urge  upon  Charles  the  prohibition  of  the  meeting  at  Speier;  he  also 
suggested  the  deposition  of  the  Elector  Frederick  as  a  warning  to  other 
rebellious  Princes.  The  Emperor  was  nothing  loth  ;  on  July  15  he  for- 
bade the  proposed  assembly  at  Speier,  and,  although  there  is  no  evidence 
that  he  would  have  proceeded  to  so  dangerous  and  violent  a  measure  as 
the  deposition  of  Frederick,  he  broke  off  former  friendly  relations  and 
insulted  the  whole  Saxon  House  by  marrying  his  sister  Catharine  to 
King  John  of  Portugal  instead  of  to  Frederick's  nephew,  John  Fred- 
erick, to  whom  she  had  been  betrothed  as  the  price  of  the  Elector's 
support  of  Charles'  candidature  for  the  Empire  in  1519. 

Before  the  news  of  these  steps  had  reached  Germany  both  sides  had 
begun  preparations  for  the  struggle.  Campeggio  had  been  empowered, 
in  case  of  the  failure  of  his  mission  to  the  Diet,  to  organise  a  sectional 
gathering  of  Catholic  Princes  in  order  to  frustrate  the  threatened 
national  Council.  This  assembly,  the  first  indication  of  the  permanent 
religious  disruption  of  Germany,  met  at  Ratisbon  towards  the  end  of 
June.  Its  principal  members  were  the  Archduke  Ferdinand,  the  two 
Dukes  of  Bavaria,  and  nine  bishops  of  southern  Germany ;  and  the 
anti-national  character  of  the  meeting  was  emphasised  by  the  abstinence 
of  every  elector,  lay  or  clerical.  It  was,  however,  something  more  than 
a  particularist  gathering ;  it  sought  to  take  the  wind  out  of  the  sails  of 
the  Reformation  by  reforming  the  Church  from  within,  and  it  was  in 
fact  a  Counter-Reformation  in  miniature.  The  spiritual  lords  consented 
to  pay  a  fifth  of  their  revenues  to  the  temporal  authority  as  the  price  of 
the  suppression  of  Lutheran  doctrine.  The  grievances  of  the  laity  with 
respect  to  clerical  fees  and  clerical  morals  were  to  some  extent  redressed  ; 
the  excessive  number  of  saints'  days  and  holy  days  was  curtailed.  The 
use  of  excommunication  and  interdict  for  trivial  matters  was  forbidden ; 
and  while  the  reading  of  Lutheran  books  was  prohibited,  preachers  were 
enjoined  to  expound  the  Scriptures  according  to  the  teaching,  not  of 
medieval  schoolmen,  but  of  the  great  Fathers  of  the  Church,  Cyprian, 
Chrysostom,  Augustine,  Jerome,  Ambrose,  and  Gregory.  Eck  published 
a  collection  of  Loci  Communes  to  counteract  Melanchthon's,  and  Emser  a 
version  of  the  Bible  to  correct  Luther's,  and  a  systematic  persecution  of 
heretics  was  commenced  in  the  territories  of  the  parties  to  the  conference. 


1524]  Party  Meetings  at  Ratishon  and  Speiev  173 

Meanwhile,  in  ignorance  of  the  impending  blow,  the  greater  part  of 
Germany  was  preparing  for  the  national  Council  or  Synod  at  Speier. 
The  news  of  the  convention  at  Ratisbon  stimulated  the  Reformers' 
zeal.  The  cities  held  meetings  first  at  Speier  and  then  at  Ulm,  where 
they  were  joined  by  representatives  of  the  nobles  of  the  Rhine  districts, 
the  Eifel,  Wetterau,  and  Westerwald.  They  bound  themselves  to  act 
together,  and  ordered  preachers  to  confine  themselves  to  the  Gospel  and 
the  prophetic  and  apostolic  Scriptures.  These  gatherings  represented  but 
a  fraction  of  the  strength  of  the  party  of  doctrinal  reform.  The  almost 
simultaneous  adoption  of  Lutheranism  by  Prussia,  Silesia,  and  part  of 
Pomerania,  by  Brandenburg-Culmbach,  and  by  Hesse,  Brunswick-Liine- 
burg,  Schleswig,  and  Holstein  proves  that  the  proposed  national  Council 
at  Speier  would  have  commanded  the  allegiance  of  the  greater  j^art  of 
north  Germany,  and  might,  through  its  adherents  in  great  cities  like 
Strassburg,  Augsburg,  and  Ulm,  have  swept  even  the  south  within  the 
net  of  a  national  revolt  from  Rome.  That  consummation  was  post- 
poned by  the  united  action  of  Charles,  of  Clement,  and  of  the  Princes 
and  Bishops  at  Ratisbon ;  but  the  Empire  was  riven  in  twain,  and 
while  the  rival  parties  were  debating  each  other's  destruction,  the  first 
rumblings  were  heard  of  a  storm  which  threatened  to  overwhelm  them 
both  in  a  common  ruin.  The  peasant,  to  whom  scores  of  ballads  and 
satires  had  lightly  appealed  as  the  arbiter  of  the  situation,  was  coming 
to  claim  his  own,  and  the  social  revolution  was  at  hand. 


CHAPTER  VI 

SOCIAL  KEVOLUTION  AND  CATHOLIC   REACTION 
IN    GERMANY 

The  most  frequent  and  damaging  charge  levelled  at  Luther  between 
1520  and  1525  reproached  him  with  being  the  apostle  of  revolution  and 
anarchy,  and  predicted  that  his  attacks  on  spiritual  authority  would 
develop  into  a  campaign  against  civil  order  unless  he  were  promptly 
suppressed.  The  indictment  had  been  preferred  in  the  Edict  of  Worms, 
it  was  echoed  by  the  Nuncio  two  years  later  at  Niirnberg,  and  it  was 
the  ground  of  the  humanist  revolt  from  his  ranks.  By  his  denunciations 
of  Princes  in  1523  and  152^  as  being  for  the  most  part  the  greatest  fools 
or  the  greatest  rogues  on  earth,  by  his  application  of  the  text  "  He 
hath  put  down  the  mighty  from  their  seats,"  and  by  his  assertion  of 
the  principle  that  human  authority  might  be  resisted  when  its  mandates 
conflicted  with  the  Word  of  God,  Luther  had  confirmed  the  suspicion. 
There  was  enough  truth  in  it  to  give  point  to  Murner's  satire  of 
Luther  as  the  champion  of  the  Btindschuh,  the  leader  of  those  who 
proclaimed  that,  as  Christ  had  freed  them  all,  and  all  were  children  and 
heirs  of  one  father,  all  should  share  alike,  all  be  priests  and  gentlemen, 
and  pay  rents  and  respect  to  no  man.  The  outbreak  of  the  Peasants' 
War  appeared  to  be  an  invincible  corroboration  of  the  charge,  and 
from  that  day  to  this  it  has  been  almost  a  commonplace  with  Catholic 
historians  that  the  Reformation  was  the  parent  of  the  revolt. 

It  lias  been  no  less  a  point  of  honour  with  Protestant  writers,  and 
especially  with  Germans,  to  vindicate  both  the  man  and  the  movement 
from  the  taint  of  revolution.  The  fact  that  the  peasants  adopted  the 
Lutlieran  phrases  about  brotherly  love  and  Christian  liberty  proves 
little,  for  in  a  theological  age  it  is  difficult  to  express  any  movement 
except  in  theological  terms,  and  behind  these  common  phrases  there 
lay  a  radical  divergence  of  aims  and  methods.  The  Gospel  according 
to  Luther  may  have  contained  a  message  for  villeins  and  serfs,  but  it 
did  not  proclaim  the  worldly  redemption  they  sought  ;  and  the  motives 
of  the  peasants  in  1525  were  similar  to  those  which  had  precipitated 
half-a-dozen  local  revolts  before  Luther  appeared  on  the  scene.     Even 

174 


1524]  Origin  of  the  Peasants'  Revolt  175 

in  1524  the  earliest  sets  of  articles  propounded  by  the  peasants  con- 
tained no  mention  of  religious  reform. 

And  yet  the  assertion  that  there  was  no  connection  between  the 
Reformation  and  the  Peasants'  Revolt  is  as  far  from  the  truth  as  the 
statement  that  the  one  produced  the  other.  The  frequent  association  of 
religious  and  social  movements  excludes  the  theory  of  mere  coincidence. 
Wat  Tyler  trod  on  the  heels  of  Wiclif,  and  Ziska  on  those  of  Hus; 
Kett  appeared  at  the  dawn  of  English  Puritanism,  and  the  Levellers  at 
its  zenith.  When  one  house  is  blown  up,  its  neighbour  is  sure  to  be 
shaken,  especially  if  both  stand  on  the  same  foundation;  and  all  govern- 
ment, whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  rests  ultimately  on  the  same  basis. 
It  is  not  reason,  it  is  not  law,  still  less  is  it  force;  it  is  mainly  custom 
and  habit.  Without  a  voluntary  and  unreasoning  adherence  to  custom 
and  deference  to  authority  all  society  and  all  government  would  be 
impossible;  and  the  disturbance  of  this  habit  in  any  one  respect  weakens 
the  forces  of  law  and  order  in  all.  When  habit  is  broken,  reason  and 
passion  are  called  into  play,  and  it  would  be  hard  to  say  which  is 
more  fatal  to  human  institutions.  The  Reformation  had  by  an  appeal 
to  reason  and  passion  destroyed  the  habit  of  unreasoning  obedience  to 
the  Papacy,  and  less  venerable  institutions  inevitably  felt  the  shock. 

This  appeal  against  habit  and  custom  was  made  to  the  peasant  more 
directly  than  to  any  other  class.  Popular  literature  and  popular  art 
erected  him  into  a  sort  of  saviour  of  society.  In  scores  of  dialogues 
he  intervenes  and  confounds  with  his  common  sense  the  learning  of 
doctors  of  law  and  theology;  he  knows  as  much  of  the  Scriptures  as 
three  parsons  and  more ;  and  in  his  typical  embodiment  as  Karsthans  he 
demolishes  the  arguments  of  Luther's  antagonist,  Murner.  He  is  the 
hero  of  nearly  all  contemporary  pamphlets;  with  his  hoe  and  his  flail 
he  will  defend  the  Gospel  if  it  comes  to  fighting;  and  even  Luther 
himself,  when  Sickingen  had  failed,  sought  to  frighten  Princes  and 
Prelates  with  the  peasant's  sceptre.  The  peasant  was  the  unknown 
factor  of  the  situation ;  his  power  was  incalculable,  but  it  would  not  be 
exerted  in  favour  of  existing  institutions,  and  when  hard  pressed  the 
religious  Reformers  were  prepared,  like  Frankenstein,  to  call  into 
existence  a  being  over  which  their  control  was  imperfect. 

The  discontent  of  the  peasantry  in  Germany,  as  in  other  countries 
of  Europe,  had  been  a  painfully  obvious  fact  for  more  than  a 
generation,  and  since  1490  it  had  broken  out  in  revolts  in  Elsass,  in 
the  Netherlands,  in  Wiirttemberg,  at  Kempten,  at  Bruchsal,  and  in 
Hungary.  The  device  of  the  peasant's  shoe,  whence  their  league  acquired 
the  name  of  Bundschuh,  had  been  adopted  as  early  as  1493,  and  again 
in  1502;  and  the  electoral  Princes  themselves  had  admitted  that  the 
common  people  were  burdened  with  feudal  services,  taxes,  ecclesiastical 
Courts,  and  other  exactions,  which  would  eventually  prove  intolerable. 
Hans  Rosenbliit  complained  before  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  that 


176  The  grievances  of  the  Peasants  [i524 

the  nobles  were  constantly  demanding  more  and  more  from  the  peasant; 
and  the  process  of  extortion  did  not  slacken  in  the  succeeding  years. 
The  noble  himself  was  feeling  the  weight  of  the  economic  revolution,  of 
the  increase  in  prices,  and  depression  in  agriculture;  and  he  naturally 
sought  to  shift  it  from  his  own  shoulders  to  those  of  his  villeins  and 
serfs,  that  lowest  substratum  of  society  on  which  all  burdens  ultimately 
rest.  He  endeavoured  to  redress  the  relative  depreciation  in  the  value 
of  land  by  increasing  the  amount  of  rent  and  services  which  he  received 
from  its  tillers. 

Nor  was  this  the  only  trouble  in  which  the  peasants  were  involved. 
The  evil  of  enclosures,  although  it  was  felt  in  Germany,  was  not  so 
prominent  among  their  complaints  as  it  was  in  England;  but  their 
general  distress  produced  two  other  symptoms,  one  of  which  seems  to 
have  been  peculiar  to  those  districts  of  Germany  in  which  the  revolt 
raged  with  the  greatest  fury.  In  the  south-west,  in  the  valleys  of  the 
Tauber  and  the  Neckar,  in  the  Moselle  and  middle  Rhine  districts,  the 
practice  of  subdividing  land  had  proceeded  so  far  that  the  ordinary 
holding  of  the  peasant  had  shrunk  to  the  quarter  of  a  ploughland;  and 
the  effort  to  check  this  ruinous  development  only  resulted  in  the  creation 
of  a  landless  agrarian  proletariat.  The  other  process,  which  was  not 
confined  to  Germany,  was  the  conversion  of  land  into  a  speculative 
market  for  money.  The  financial  embarrassments  of  the  peasant  rendered 
him  an  easy  prey  to  the  burgher-capitalist  who  lent  him  money  on  the 
security  of  his  holding,  the  interest  on  which  was  of  ten  not  forthcoming 
if  the  harvest  failed  or  the  plague  attacked  his  cattle ;  and  the  traffic 
in  rents,  which  inevitably  bore  hardly  on  the  tenant,  was  one  of  the 
somewhat  numerous  evils  which  Luther  at  one  time  or  another  declared 
to  be  the  ruin  of  the  German  nation. 

Besides  these  economic  causes,  the  growing  influence  of  Roman  law 
affected  the  peasant  even  more  than  it  had  done  the  barons.  By  it, 
said  the  Emperor  Maximilian,  the  poor  man  either  got  no  justice  at 
all  against  the  rich,  or  it  was  so  sharp  and  fine-pointed  that  it  availed 
him  nothing.  Ignoring  the  fine  distinctions  of  feudal  law  with  respect 
to  service  it  regarded  the  rendering  of  service  as  proof  of  servitude, 
and  everyone  who  was  not  entirely  free  sank  in  its  eyes  to  a  serf.  The 
policy  of  reducing  tenants  to  this  position  was  systematically  pursued 
in  many  districts ;  the  Abbots  of  Kempten  resorted  not  merely  to  the 
falsification  of  charters  but  to  such  abuse  of  their  clerical  powers  as 
refusing  the  Sacrament  to  those  who  denied  their  servitude;  and  one  of 
them  defended  his  conduct  on  the  ground  that  he  was  only  doing  as 
other  lords.  It  was  in  fact  the  lords  and  not  the  peasants  who  were 
the  revolutionists ;  the  revolt  was  essentially  reactionary.  The  peasants 
demanded  the  restoration  of  their  old  Haingerichte  and  other  Courts, 
the  abolition  of  novel  jurisdictions  and  new  exactions  of  rent  and  service. 
The  movement  was  an  attempt  to  revive  the  worn-out  communal  system 


1524]  Beginnings  of  the  Tisinrj  Yll 

of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  a  socialistic  protest  against  the  individualistic 
tendencies  of  the  time. 

The  peasant's  condition  was  fruitful  soil  for  the  seeds  of  a  gospel 
of  discontent.  The  aristocratic  humanist  revival  awoke  no  echoes  in 
his  breast,  but  he  found  balm  of  Gilead  in  Luther's  denunciations  of 
merchants  as  usurers,  of  lawyers  as  robbers,  and  in  his  assertion  of  the 
worthlessness  of  all  things  compared  with  the  Word  of  God,  which 
peasants  could  understand  better  than  priests.  More  radical  preachers 
supplied  whatever  was  lacking  in  Luther's  doctrine  to  complete  their 
exaltation.  Carlstadt  improved  on  Luther's  declaration  tliat  peasants 
knew  more  of  the  Scriptures  than  learned  doctors  by  affirming  that 
they  certainly  knew  more  than  Luther.  Peasants  adopted  with  fervour 
the  doctrine  of  universal  priesthood,  and  began  themselves  to  preach 
and  baptise.  Schappeler  announced  at  Memmingen  that  heaven  was 
open  to  peasants,  but  closed  to  nobles  and  clergy.  But  while  this  was 
heresy,  it  was  hardly  sedition ;  most  of  the  preachers  believed  as  Luther 
did,  in  the  efficacy  of  the  Word,  and  repudiated  Miinzer's  appeal  to  the 
sword  ;  and  the  promise  of  heaven  hereafter  might  be  expected  to 
reconcile  rather  than  to  exasperate  the  peasant  with  his  lot  on  earth. 
Yet  it  exerted  an  indirect  stimulus,  for  men  do  not  rebel  in  despair, 
but  in  hope  ;  and  the  spiritual  hopes  held  out  by  the  Gospel  produced 
that  quickening  of  his  mind,  without  which  the  peasant  would  never 
have  risen  to  end  his  temporal  ills. 

The  outbreak  in  1524  can  only  have  caused  surprise  by  its  extent, 
for  that  the  peasants  would  rise  was  a  common  expectation.  Almanacks 
and  astrologers  predicted  the  storm  with  remarkable  accuracy  ;  indeed 
its  mutterings  had  been  heard  for  years,  and  in  1522  friends  of  the  exiled 
Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg  had  discussed  a  plan  for  his  restoration  to  the 
duchy  by  means  of  a  peasant  revolt.  But  the  first  step  in  the  great 
movement  was  not  due  to  Ulrich  or  to  any  other  extraneous  impulse. 
It  was  taken  in  June,  1524,  on  the  estates  of  Count  Siegmund  von  Lupfen 
at  Stiihlingen,  some  miles  to  the  north-west  of  Schaffhausen.  There 
had  already  been  a  number  of  local  disturbances  elsewhere,  and  the 
peasantry  round  Niirnberg  had  burnt  their  tithes  on  the  field  ;  but  they 
had  all  been  suppressed  without  difficulty.  The  rising  at  Stiihlingen  is 
traditionally  reported  to  have  been  provoked  by  a  whim  of  the  Countess 
von  Lupfen,  who  insisted  upon  the  Count's  tenants  spending  a  holiday 
in  collecting  snail-shells  on  which  she  might  wind  her  wool  ;  and  this 
trivial  reason  has  been  remembered,  to  the  oblivion  of  the  more  weighty 
causes  alleged  by  the  peasants  in  their  list  of  grievances.  They  complained 
of  the  enclosure  of  woods,  the  alienation  of  common  lands,  and  the 
denial  of  their  right  to  fish  in  streams  ;  they  were  compelled,  they  said, 
to  do  all  kinds  of  field-work  for  their  lord  and  his  steward,  to  assist  at 
hunts,  to  draw  ponds  and  streams  without  any  regard  to  the  necessities 
of  their  own  avocations  ;   the  lord's  streams  were  diverted  across  their 

C.     M.    H.    II.  12 


178  Spread  of  the  movement  [i524 

fields,  while  water  necessary  for  irrigating  their  meadows  and  turning 
their  mills  was  cut  off,  and  their  crops  were  ruined  by  huntsmen 
trampling  them  down.  They  accused  their  lord  of  abusing  his  juris- 
diction, of  inflicting  intolerable  punishments,  and  of  appropriating 
stolen  goods  ;  and  in  short  they  declared  that  they  could  no  longer 
look  for  justice  at  his  hands,  or  support  their  wives  and  families  in  face 
of  his  exactions. 

These  articles,  which  number  sixty -two  in  all,  are  as  remarkable  for 
what  they  omit  as  for  what  they  include.  There  is  no  trace  of  a  religious 
element  in  them,  no  indication  that  their  authors  had  ever  heard  of 
Luther  or  of  the  Gospel.  They  are  purely  agrarian  in  character,  their 
language  is  moderate,  and,  if  the  facts  are  stated  correctly,  their  demands 
are  extremely  reasonable.  In  its  origin  the  Peasants'  Revolt  bore  few 
traces  of  the  intellectual  and  physical  violence  which  marked  its  later 
course.  It  began  like  a  trickling  stream  in  the  highlands  ;  as  it  flowed 
downwards  it  was  joined  first  by  one  and  then  by  another  revolutionary 
current,  till  it  united  in  one  torrent  all  elements  of  disorder  and 
threatened  to  inundate  the  whole  of  Germany. 

When  once  the  movement  had  started,  it  quickly  gathered  momentum. 
A  thousand  tenants  from  the  Stlihlingen  district  assembled  with  such 
arms  as  they  could  collect,  and  chose  as  their  captain  Hans  Miiller  of 
Bulgenbach,  an  old  landsknecht  who  showed  more  talent  for  organisation 
than  most  of  the  peasants'  leaders.  In  August  he  made  his  way  south 
to  Waldshut,  probably  with  the  object  of  obtaining  the  co-operation 
of  the  discontented  proletariate  in  the  towns.  The  towns  had  been 
permeated  with  new  religious  ideas  to  an  extent  which  was  almost 
unknown  in  the  country,  the  upper  classes  by  Lutheranism,  the  lower 
by  notions  of  which  Carlstadt  and  Miinzer  were  the  chief  exponents. 
Waldshut  itself  was  in  revolt  against  its  Austrian  government,  which 
had  initiated  a  savage  persecution  of  heretics  in  the  neighbourhood  and 
demanded  from  the  citizens  the  surrender  of  their  preacher,  Balthasar 
Hubmaier.  It  was  thus  predisposed  to  favour  the  peasants'  cause,  but 
the  often  repeated  statement  that  Midler,  in  August,  1524,  succeeded  in 
establishing  an  Evangelical  Brotherhood  is  incorrect.  That  scheme,  which 
probably  emanated  from  the  towns,  was  not  effected  until  the  meeting 
at  Memmingen  in  the  following  February  ;  and  the  intervening  winter 
elapsed  without  open  conflict  between  the  peasants  and  the  authorities. 
The  Archduke  Ferdinand's  attention  was  absorbed  by  the  momentous 
struggle  then  being  waged  in  North  Italy,  and  every  available  lands- 
knecht had  been  sent  to  swell  the  armies  of  Charles  V.  The  Swabian 
League,  the  only  eifective  organisation  in  South  Germany,  could  muster 
but  two  thousand  troops,  and  recourse  was  had  to  negotiations  at 
Stockach  which  were  not  seriously  meant  on  the  part  of  the  lords. 
Many  of  the  peasants,  however,  returned  home  on  the  understanding 
that  none   but   ancient   services  should   be   exacted  :    but   the   lords, 


1525]  Religious  element  in  the  movement  179 

thinking  that  the  storm  had  blown  over,  resorted  to  their  usual  prac- 
tices and  made  little  endeavour  to  conclude  the  pourparlers  at  Stockach. 
As  a  result  the  insurrection  broke  out  afresh,  and  was  extended  into  a 
wider  area. 

In  October  and  November,  1524,  there  were  risings  of  the  peasants 
all  round  the  Lake  of  Constance,  in  the  Allgau,  the  Klettgau,  the  Hegau, 
the  Thurgau,  and  north-west  of  Stiihlingen  at  Villingen.  Further  to 
the  east,  on  the  Iller  in  Upper  Swabia,  the  tenants  of  the  abbey  of 
Kempten,  who  had  long  nursed  grievances  against  their  lords,  rose,  and 
in  February,  1525,  assembled  at  Sonthofen  ;  they  declared  that  they 
would  have  no  more  lords,  a  revolutionary  demand  which  indicates  that 
their  treatment  by  the  abbots  had  been  worse  than  that  of  the  Lupfen 
tenants.  The  peasants  of  the  Donauried  (N.W.  of  Augsburg)  had  been 
agitating  throughout  the  winter,  and  by  the  first  week  in  February 
four  thousand  of  them  met  at  Baltringen,  some  miles  to  the  north  of 
Biberach  ;  before  the  end  of  the  month  their  numbers  had  risen  to 
thirty  thousand.  They  were  also  joined  by  bands  called  the  Seehaufen^ 
from  the  northern  shores  of  Lake  Constance,  while  Hans  Miiller  made 
an  incursion  into  the  Breisgau  and  raised  the  peasants  of  the  Black 
Forest. 

As  the  rebellion  extended  its  area  the  scope  of  its  objects  grew 
wider,  and  it  assimilated  revolutionary  ideas  distinct  from  the  agrarian 
grievances  which  had  originally  prompted  the  rising.  A  religious  ele- 
ment began  to  obtrude,  and  its  presence  was  probably  due  to  the  fact 
that  it  supplied  a  convenient  banner  under  which  heterogeneous  forces 
might  fight  ;  Sickingen  had  adopted  a  similar  expedient  to  cloak  the 
sectional  aims  of  the  knights,  and  men  now  began  to  regard  the  revolt  as  a 
rising  on  behalf  of  the  Gospel.  In  this  light  it  was  viewed  by  the  neigh- 
bouring city  of  Zurich,  where  Zwingli's  influence  was  now  all-powerful  ; 
and  the  Zurich  government  exhorted  the  Klettgau  peasants  to  adopt 
the  Word  of  God  as  their  banner.  In  conformity  with  this  advice  they 
gave  a  religious  colour  to  their  demands,  and  in  January,  1525,  offered 
to  grant  their  lord  whatever  was  reasonable,  godly,  and  Christian,  if  he 
on  his  side  would  undertake  to  abide  by  the  Word  of  God  and  righteous- 
ness. So,  too,  the  Baltringen  bands  declared  that  they  wished  to  create 
no  disturbance,  but  only  desired  that  their  grievances  should  be  re- 
dressed in  accord  with  godly  justice  ;  and  in  the  Allgau,  where  the 
peasant  Haberlin  had  preached  and  baptised,  the  peasants  formed  them- 
selves into  a  "  godly  union."  On  the  other  hand  the  Lake  bands,  with 
whom  served  some  remnants  of  Sickingen's  host,  appear  to  have  been 
more  intent  upon  a  political  attack  on  lords  and  cities. 

In  March  all  these  bodies  held  a  sort  of  parliament  at  Memmingen, 
the  chief  town  of  Upper  Swabia,  to  concert  a  common  basis  of  action, 
and  here  the  Zurich  influence  carried  the  day.  Schappeler,  Zwingli's 
friend,  had  been  preaching  at  Memmingen  on  the  iniquity  of  tithes,  and 


180  The  Articles  of  Memmingen  [l552 

if  he  did  not  actually  pen  the  famous  Twelve  Articles  there  formulated, 
they  were  at  least  drawn  up  under  his  inspiration  and  that  of  his 
colleague  Lotzer.  They  embody  ideas  of  wider  import  than  are  likely 
to  have  occurred  to  bands  of  peasants  concerned  with  specific  local 
grievances  ;  and  throughout  the  movement  it  is  obvious  that,  while  the 
peasants  supplied  the  physical  force  and  their  hardships  the  real  motive, 
the  intellectual  inspiration  came  from  the  radical  element  in  the  towns. 
This  element  was  not  so  obvious  at  Memmingen  as  it  became  later  on, 
and  its  chief  effect  there  was  to  give  a  religious  aspect  to  the  revolt  and 
to  merge  its  local  character  in  a  universal  appeal  to  the  peasant,  based 
on  ideas  of  fraternal  love  and  Christian  liberty  drawn  from  the  Gospel. 

This  programme  was  not  adopted  without  some  difference  of  opinion, 
in  which  the  Lake  bands  led  the  opposition.  But  the  proposal  of  an 
Evangelical  Brotherhood  was  accepted  on  March  7  ;  and  the  Twelve 
Articles,  founded  apparently  upon  a  memorial  previously  presented  by 
the  people  of  Memmingen  to  their  town  Council,  were  then  drawn  up. 
The  preamble  repudiated  the  idea  that  the  insurgents'  "  new  Gospel  " 
implied  the  extirpation  of  spiritual  and  temporal  authority ;  on  the  con- 
trary, they  quoted  texts  to  show  that  its  essence  was  love,  peace,  patience, 
and  unity,  and  that  the  aim  of  the  peasants  was  that  all  men  should  live 
in  accord  with  its  precepts.  As  means  thereto  they  demanded  that 
the  choice  of  pastors  should  be  vested  in  each  community,  which  should 
also  have  power  to  remove  such  as  behaved  unseemly.  The  great  tithes 
they  are  willing  to  pay,  and  they  proposed  measures  for  their  collection 
and  for  the  application  of  the  surplus  to  the  relief  of  the  poor,  and,  in 
case  of  necessity,  to  the  expenses  of  war  or  to  meet  the  demands  of  the 
tax-gatherer  ;  but  the  small  tithes  they  would  not  pay,  because  God 
had  created  the  beasts  of  the  field  as  a  free  gift  for  the  use  of  mankind. 
They  would  no  longer  be  villeins,  because  Christ  had  made  all  men 
free  ;  but  they  would  gladly  obey  such  authority  as  was  elected  and  set 
over  them,  so  it  be  by  God  appointed.  They  claimed  the  right  to  take 
ground  game,  fowls,  and  fish  in  flowing  water  ;  they  demanded  the 
restoration  of  woods,  meadows,  and  ploughlands  to  the  community,  the 
renunciation  of  new-fangled  services,  and  payment  of  peasants  for  those 
which  they  rendered,  the  establishment  of  judicial  rents,  the  even 
administration  of  justice,  and  the  abolition  of  death-dues,  which  ruined 
widows  and  orphans.  Finally,  they  required  that  all  their  grievances 
should  be  tested  by  the  Word  of  God;  if  aught  which  they  had  demanded 
were  proved  to  be  contrary  to  Scripture,  they  agreed  to  give  it  up,  even 
though  the  demand  had  been  granted  ;  and  on  the  other  hand  they 
asked  that  tlieir  lords  should  submit  to  the  same  test  and  relinquish 
any  privileges  wliich  might  hereafter  be  shown  to  be  inconsistent  with 
tlie  Scriptures,  although  they  were  not  included  in  the  present  list  of 
grievances. 

On  the  basis   of  these  demands  negotiations  were  reopened  with 


i52o]  Ulrich  of  Wilrttemberg  181 

the  Swabian  League  at  Ulm,  but  they  were  not  more  successful  or 
sincere  than  those  at  Stockach.  The  League  rejected  an  offer  of 
mediation  made  by  the  Council  of  Regency  which  now  sat  with  diminished 
prestige  at  Esslingen  ;  and,  though  the  discussions  were  continued,  they 
Avere  only  designed  to  give  Truchsess,  the  general  of  the  League,  time 
to  gather  his  forces  :  even  during  the  progress  of  the  negotiations 
he  had  attacked  and  massacred  unsuspecting  bands  of  Hegau  peas- 
ants, till  his  victorious  progress  was  checked  by  the  advent  of  a  dif- 
ferent foe. 

Ulrich,  the  exiled  Duke  of  Wiirttemberg,  and  his  party  constituted 
one  of  the  discontented  elements  which  were  certain  to  rally  to  any 
revolutionary  standard.  He  had  announced  his  intention  of  regaining- 
his  duchy  with  the  help  of  "spur  or  shoe,"  of  knights  or  peasants.  The 
former  hope  was  quenched  by  Sickingen's  fall,  but  as  soon  as  the  peasants 
rose  Ulrich  began  to  cultivate  their  friendship  ;  in  the  autumn  of  1524, 
from  Hohentwiel,  of  which  he  had  recovered  possession,  on  the  confines 
of  the  territory  of  his  Swiss  protectors  and  of  the  disturbed  Hegau,  he 
established  relations  with  the  insurgents,  and  took  to  signing  his  name 
"  Utz  the  Peasant."  In  February,  1525,  he  resolved  to  tempt  his  fate  ; 
supported  by  ten  thousand  hired  Swiss  infantry  he  crossed  the  border 
and  invaded  Wiirttemberg.  The  civil  and  religious  oppression  of  the 
Austrian  rule  had  to  some  extent  wiped  out  the  memory  of  Ulrich's  own 
harsh  government,  and  he  was  able  to  occupy  Ballingen,  Herrenberg, 
and  Sindelfingen  without  serious  opposition,  and  to  lay  siege  to  Stuttgart 
on  March  9.  The  news  brought  Truchsess  into  Wiirttemberg;  but 
Ulrich  was  on  the  eve  of  success  when  the  tidings  came  of  the  battle  of 
Pavia  (February  24).  Switzerland  might  need  all  her  troops  for  her 
own  defence,  and  those  serving  under  Ulrich's  baniier  were  promptly 
summoned  home.  There  was  nothing  left  for  Ulrich  but  flight  so  soon 
as  Truchsess  appeared  upon  the  scene;  and  the  restoration  of  Austrian 
authority  in  Wiirttemberg  enabled  the  general  of  the  Swabian  League 
once  more  to  turn  his  arms  against  the  peasants. 

But  the  respite,  short  as  it  was,  had  given  the  revolt  time  to  spread 
in  all  directions,  and  before  the  end  of  April  almost  the  whole  of  Germany, 
except  the  north  and  east  and  Bavaria  in  the  south,  was  in  an  uproar. 
From  Upper  Swabia  the  movement  spread  in  March  to  the  lower  districts 
of  the  circle.  Round  Leipheim  on  the  Danube  to  the  north-east  of  Ulm 
the  peasants  rose  under  a  priest  named  Jacob  Wehe,  attacked  Leipheim 
and  Weissenhorn,  and  stormed  the  castle  of  Roggenburg,  while  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  Truchsess'  troops  sj^mpathised  with  their  cause  and 
refused  to  serve  against  them.  Even  so,  the  remainder,  consisting 
mostly  of  veterans  returned  from  Pavia,  were  sufficient  to  crush  the 
Leipheim  contingent,  whose  incompetence  and  cowardice  contrasted 
strongly  with  the  behaviour  of  the  Swiss  and  Bohemian  peasants  in 
previous  wars.     They  fled  into  Leipheim  almost  as  soon  as  Truchsess 


182  Risings  in  the  south  and  west  [i525 

appeared,  losing  a  third  of  their  numbers  in  the  retreat;  the  town 
thereupon  surrendered  at  discretion ;  and  Jacob  Wehe  was  discovered 
hiding,  and  executed  outside  the  walls.  Truchsess  now  turned  back 
to  crush  the  contingents  from  the  Lake  and  the  Hegau  and  the 
Baltringen  band,  which  had  captured  Waldsee  and  was  threatening 
liis  own  castle  at  Waldburg.  He  defeated  the  latter  near  Wurzach  on 
April  13,  but  was  less  successful  with  the  former,  who  were  entrenched 
near  Weingarten.  They  were  double  the  number  of  Truchsess'  troops, 
and  after  a  distant  cannonade  the  Swabian  general  consented  to  negotiate  ; 
the  peasants,  alarmed  perhaps  by  the  fate  of  their  allies,  were  induced  to 
disband  on  the  concession  of  some  of  their  demands  and  the  promise  of 
an  inquiry  into  the  rest. 

Truchsess  had  every  reason  to  be  satisfied  with  this  result,  for  from 
all  sides  appeals  were  pouring  in  for  heliD.  In  the  Hegau  Radolfzell 
was  besieged  ;  to  the  south-east  the  cardinal  archbishop  of  Salzburg, 
]Matthew  Lang,  was  soon  shut  up  in  his  castle  by  his  subjects  of  the 
city  and  neighbouring  country,  while  the  Archduke  Ferdinand  himself 
would  not  venture  outside  the  walls  of  Innsbruck.  Forty  thousand 
peasants  had  risen  in  the  Vorarlberg  ;  Tyrol  was  in  ferment  from  end  to 
end ;  and  in  Styria  Dietrichstein's  Bohemian  troops  could  not  save  him 
from  defeat  at  the  hands  of  the  peasants.  In  the  south-west  Hans  Miiller, 
the  leader  of  the  Stiihlingen  force,  moved  through  the  Black  Forest, 
and  raising  the  Breisgau  villagers  appeared  before  Freiburg.  The 
fortress  on  the  neighbouring  Schlossberg  was  unable  to  protect  the  city, 
which  admitted  the  peasants  on  May  24.  Across  the  Rhine  in  Elsass 
twenty  thousand  insurgents  captured  Zabern  on  May  13,  and  made 
themselves  masters  of  Weissenburg  and  most  of  the  other  towns  in  the 
province  ;  Colmar  alone  withstood  their  progress.  Further  north  in  the 
west  Rhine  districts  of  the  Palatinate,  Lauterburg,  Landau,  and  Neustadt 
fell  into  the  rebels'  hands,  and  on  the  east  side  of  the  river  they  carried 
all  before  them.  In  the  Odenwald  George  Metzler,  an  innkeeper,  had 
raised  the  standard  of  revolt  before  the  end  of  March,  and  Jacklein 
Rohrbach  followed  his  example  in  the  Neckarthal  on  the  first  of  April. 
Florian  Geyer  headed  the  Franconian  rebels  who  gathered  in  the  valley 
of  the  Tauber,  and  the  Austrian  government  in  Wiirttemberg  had 
barely  got  rid  of  Ulrich  Avhen  it  was  threatened  by  a  more  dangerous 
enemy  in  the  peasants  under  Matern  Feuerbacher.  Further  north  still, 
the  Thuringian  commons  broke  out  under  the  lead  of  Thomas  Miinzer. 

So  widespread  a  movement  inevitably  gathered  into  its  net  perso- 
nalities and  forces  of  every  description.  The  bulk  of  the  insurgents  and 
some  of  their  leaders  were  j^easants  ;  but  willingly  or  unwillingly  the}'" 
received  into  their  ranks  criminals,  priests,  ex-officials,  barons,  and  even 
some  ruling  Princes.  Florian  Geyer  was  a  knight  more  or  less  of  Sickingen's 
type,  who  threw  himself  heart  and  soul  into  the  peasants'  cause.  Gotz  von 
Berlichingen,  the  hero  of  Goethe's  drama  known  as  Gotz  of  the  Iron 


1525] 


Men  and  measures  183 


Hand  —  he  had  lost  one  hand  in  battle  —  came  from  the  same  class.  In 
his  memoirs  he  represents  his  complicity  in  the  revolt  as  the  result  of 
compulsion,  but  before  there  was  any  question  of  force  he  had  given 
vent  to  such  sentiments  as  that  the  knights  suffered  as  much  from  the 
Princes'  oppression  as  did  the  peasants,  and  his  action  was  probably  more 
voluntary  than  he  afterwards  cared  to  admit.  The  lower  clergy,  many 
of  them  drawn  from  the  peasants,  naturally  sympathised  with  the  class 
from  which  they  sprang,  and  they  had  no  cause  to  dislike  a  movement 
which  aimed  at  a  redistribution  of  the  wealth  of  Princes  and  Bishops ; 
in  some  cases  all  the  inmates  of  a  monastery  except  the  abbot  willingly 
joined  the  insurgents.  Some  of  the  leaders  were  respectable  innkeepers 
like  Matern  Feuerbacher,  but  others  were  roysterers  such  as  Jacklein 
Rohrbach,  and  among  their  followers  were  many  recruits  from  the 
criminal  classes.  These  baser  elements  often  thrust  aside  the  better, 
and  by  their  violence  brought  odium  upon  the  whole  movement.  The 
peasants  had  indeed  contemplated  the  use  of  force  from  the  beginning, 
and  those  who  refused  to  join  the  Evangelical  Brotherhood  were  to  be  put 
under  a  ban,  or  in  modern  phraseology,  subjected  to  a  boycott ;  but  the 
burning  of  castles  and  monasteries  seems  first  to  have  been  adopted  in 
retaliation  for  Truchsess'  destruction  of  peasants'  dwellings,  and  for  the 
most  part  the  insurgents'  misdeeds  arose  from  a  natural  inability  to 
resist  the  temptations  of  seigneurial  fishponds  and  wine-cellars. 

No  less  heterogeneous  than  the  factors  of  which  the  revolutionary 
horde  was  composed  were  the  ideas  and  motives  by  which  it  was  moved. 
There  was  many  a  private  and  local  grudge  as  well  as  class  and  common 
grievances.  In  Salzburg  the  Archbishop  had  retained  feudal  privileges 
from  which  most  German  cities  were  free  ;  in  the  Austrian  duchies  there 
was  a  German  national  feeling  against  the  repressive  rule  of  Ferdinand's 
Spanish  ministers  ;  religious  persecution  helped  the  revolt  at  Brixen,  for 
Strauss  and  Urbanus  Regius  had  there  made  many  converts  to  Luther's 
Gospel;  others  complained  of  the  tyranny  of  mine-owners  like  the 
Fuggers  and  other  capitalist  rings  ;  and  in  not  a  few  districts  the  rising 
assumed  the  character  of  a  Judenhetze.  The  peasants  all  over  Germany 
were  animated  mainly  by  the  desire  to  redress  agrarian  grievances, 
but  hatred  of  prelatical  wealth  and  privilege  and  of  the  voracious 
territorial  power  of  Princes  was  a  bond  which  united  merchants  and 
knights,  peasants  and  artisans,  in  a  common  hostility. 

Gradually,  too,  the  development  of  the  movement  led  to  the  pro- 
duction of  various  manifestoes  or  rather  crude  suggestions  for  the 
establishment  of  a  new  political  and  social  organisation.  Some  of  them 
were  foreshadowed  in  a  scheme  put  forward  by  Eberlin  in  1521,  which 
may  not,  however,  have  been  more  seriously  intended  than  Sir  Thomas 
More's  Utopia.  Its  pervading  principle  was  that  of  popular  election ; 
each  village  was  to  choose  a  gentleman  as  its  magistrate  ;  two  hundred 
chief  places  were  to  select  a  knight  for  their  bailiff ;  each  ten  bailiwicks 


184  Utopimi  schemes  [i525 

were  to  be  organised  under  a  cit}^,  and  each  ten  cities  under  a  Duke  or 
Prince.  One  of  the  Princes  was  to  be  elected  King,  but  he,  like  every 
subordinate  officer,  was  to  be  guided  by  an  elected  Council.  In  this 
scheme  town  was  throughout  subordinate  to  country;  half  the  members 
of  the  Councils  were  to  be  peasants  and  half  nobles,  and  agriculture  was 
pronounced  the  noblest  means  of  sustenance.  Capitalist  organisations 
were  abolished ;  the  importation  of  wine  and  cloth  was  forbidden,  and 
that  of  corn  only  conceded  in  time  of  scarcity;  and  the  price  of  wine  and 
bread  was  to  be  fixed.  Only  articles  of  real  utility  were  to  be  manu- 
factured, and  every  form  of  luxury  was  to  be  suppressed.  Drastic 
measures  were  proposed  against  vice,  and  drunkards  and  adulterers  were 
to  be  punished  with  death.  All  children  were  to  be  taught  Latin,  Greek, 
Hebrew,  astronomy,  and  medicine. 

This  Utopian  scheme  was  too  fanciful  even  for  the  most  imaginative 
peasant  leaders,  but  their  proposals  grew  rapidly  more  extravagant. 
The  local  demand  for  the  abolition  of  seigneurial  rights  gave  place  to 
universal  ideas  of  liberty,  fraternity,  equality ;  and  it  is  scarcely  an 
exaggeration  to  say  that  the  German  peasants  in  1525  anticipated  most 
of  the  French  ideas  of  1789.  The  Twelve  Articles  of  the  Elsass  peasants 
went  beyond  the  originals  of  Memmingen  in  demanding  not  only  the 
popular  election  of  pastors  but  of  all  officials,  and  the  right  of  the 
people  to  repudiate  or  recognise  princely  authority.  So,  too,  the  peasants' 
parliament  at  Meran  in  the  Tyrol  insisted  that  all  jurisdictions  should  be 
exercised  by  persons  chosen  by  the  community.  It  was  perliaps  hostility 
to  the  Princes  rather  than  perception  of  national  needs  that  prompted 
the  agitation  for  the  reduction  of  all  Princes  to  the  status  of  lieutenants 
of  the  Emperor,  who  was  to  be  recognised  as  tlie  one  and  only  sovereign 
ruler ;  but  the  conception  of  a  democratic  Empire  had  taken  strong 
hold  of  the  popular  imagination.  Hipler  and  Weigant,  two  of  the 
clearest  thinkers  of  the  revolution,  suggested  writing  to  Charles  and 
rejiresenting  the  movement  as  aimed  at  two  objects  dear  to  his  heart, 
the  reformation  of  his  Church  and  the  subjection  of  the  Princes  to 
obedience  to  the  Empire.  They,  no  less  than  the  English,  preferred  a 
popular  despotism  to  feudal  anarch}^  Even  the  conservative  Swabians 
desired  the  abolition  of  a  number  of  petty  intermediate  jurisdictions ; 
and  in  more  radical  districts  the  proposed  vindication  of  the  Emperor's 
power  was  coupled  with  the  condition  that  it  was  to  be  wielded  in  the 
people's  interest.  The  Kaiser  was  to  be  the  minister,  and  his  subjects 
the  sovereign  authority. 

Between  this  ruler  and  his  people  there  were  to  be  no  intervening 
grades  of  society.  Equality  was  an  essential  condition  of  the  new  order 
of  things.  Nobles  like  the  counts  of  Hohenlohe  and  Henneberg,  who 
swore  through  fear  the  oath  imposed  by  the  rebels,  were  required 
to  dismantle  their  castles,  to  live  in  houses  like  peasants  and  burghers,  to 
eat  the  same  food  and  wear  the  same  dress ;  they  were  even  forbidden  to 


1525]  Party  struggles  in  the  toivns  185 

ride  on  horseback,  because  it  raised  them  above  their  fellows.  Except  he 
became  as  a  peasant  the  noble  could  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  brotherly 
love.  Who,  it  was  asked,  made  the  first  noble,  and  had  not  a  peasant 
five  fingers  to  his  hand  like  a  prince  ?  Still  more  attractive  than  the 
proposed  equality  of  social  standing  was  the  suggested  equality  of 
worldly  goods  ;  and,  though  in  the  latter  case  the  ideal  no  doubt  was 
that  of  levelling  up  and  not  of  levelling  down,  it  was  declared  enough 
for  any  man  to  possess  two  thousand  crowns. 

It  might  well  be  inferred,  even  if  it  had  not  been  stated  by  the 
peasants  themselves,  that  they  derived  these  ideas  from  teachers  in 
towns  ;  and  it  was  the  co-operation  of  the  town  proletariate  which  made 
the  revolt  so  formidable,  especially  in  Franconia  and  Thuringia.  A 
civic  counterpart  of  Eberlin's  peasant  Utopia  was  supplied  by  a  political 
pamphlet  entitled  The  Needs  of  the  Grerman  Nation,  or  The  Refor- 
mation of  Frederick  III.  As  in  the  case  of  the  Twelve  Articles  of 
Memmingen,  the  principle  of  Christian  liberty  was  to  be  the  basis  of  the 
new  organisation  ;  but  it  was  here  applied  specifically  to  the  conditions 
of  the  poorer  classes  in  towns.  Tolls,  dues,  and  especially  indirect  taxes 
should  be  abolished  ;  the  capital  of  individual  merchants  and  of 
companies  was  to  be  limited  to  ten  thousand  crowns  ;  the  coinage, 
weights,  and  measures  were  to  be  reduced  to  a  uniform  standard  ;  the 
Roman  civil  and  canon  law  to  be  abolished,  ecclesiastical  property  to  be 
confiscated,  and  clerical  participation  in  secular  trades  —  against  which 
several  Acts  of  the  English  Reformation  parliament  were  directed  —  to 
be  prohibited. 

Some  of  these  grievances,  especially  those  against  the  Church,  were 
common  to  rich  and  poor  alike,  but  socialistic  and  communistic  ideas 
naturally  tended  to  divide  every  town  and  city  into  two  parties,  and  the 
struggle  resolved  itself  into  one  between  the  commune,  representing  the 
poor,  and  the  Council,  representing  the  well-to-do.  This  contest  was 
fought  out  in  most  of  the  towns  in  Germany  ;  and  its  result  determined 
the  amount  of  sympathy  with  which  each  individual  town  regarded  the 
peasants'  cause.  But  nowhere  do  the  cities  appear  to  have  taken  an 
active  part  against  the  revolution,  for  they  all  felt  that  the  Princes 
threatened  them  as  much  as  they  did  the  peasants.  Waldshut  and 
Memmingen  from  the  first  were  friendly  ;  Zurich  rendered  active 
assistance  ;  and  there  was  a  prevalent  fear  that  the  towns  of  Switzerland 
and  Swabia  would  unite  in  support  of  the  movement.  The  strength 
shown  by  the  peasants  exercised  a  powerful  influence  over  the  intra- 
mural struggles  of  commune  and  Council,  and  in  many  of  the  smaller 
towns  and  cities  the  commune  gained  the  upper  hand.  Such  was  the 
case  at  Heilbronn,  at  Rothenburg,  where  Carlstadt  had  been  active,  and  at 
Wiirzburg.  At  Frankfort  the  proletariate  formed  an  organisation  which 
they  declared  to  be  Council,  Burgomaster,  Pope,  and  Emperor  all  rolled 
into  one  ;  and  most  of  the  small  cities  opened  their  gates  to  the  peasants, 


186  Thomas  Munzer  and  Ms  teacMng  [io24-5 

either  because  they  felt  unable  to  stand  a  siege  or  because  the  commune 
was  relatively  stronger  in  the  smaller  than  in  the  bigger  cities.  The 
latter  were  by  no  means  unaffected  by  the  general  ferment,  but  their 
agitations  were  less  directly  favourable  to  the  peasants.  In  several,  such 
as  Strassburg,  there  were  iconoclastic  riots ;  in  Catholic  cities  like 
Mainz,  Cologne,  and  Ratisbon  the  citizens  demanded  the  abolition  of 
the  Council's  financial  control,  the  suppression  of  indirect  taxation,  and 
the  extirpation  of  clerical  privilege  ;  in  others  again  their  object  was 
merely  to  free  themselves  from  the  feudal  control  of  their  lords  ;  while 
in  Bamberg  and  Speier  they  were  willing  to  admit  the  lordship  of  the 
Bishops,  but  demanded  the  secularisation  of  their  property.  In  one 
form  or  another  the  spirit  of  rebellion  pervaded  the  cities  from  Brixen 
to  Miinster  and  Osnabriick,  and  from  .Strassburg  to  Stralsund  and 
Dantzig. 

The  most  extreme  embodiment  of  the  revolutionary  spirit  was  found 
in  Thomas  Miinzer,  to  whose  influence  the  whole  movement  has  some- 
times been  ascribed.  After  his  expulsion  from  Zwickau  he  fled  to 
Prague,  where  he  announced  his  intention  of  following  the  example  of 
Hus.  His  views,  however,  resembled  more  closely  those  of  the  extreme 
Hussite  sect  known  as  Taborites,  and  their  proximity  to  Bohemia 
may  explain  the  reception  which  the  Thuringian  cities  of  Allstedt  and 
Miihlhausen  accorded  to  Miinzers  ideas.  At  Allstedt  his  success  was 
great  both  among  the  townsfolk  and  the  peasants :  here  he  was  established 
as  a  preacher  and  married  a  wife  ;  here  he  preached  his  theocratic 
doctrines,  which  culminated  in  the  assertion  that  the  godless  had  no 
right  to  live,  but  should  be  exterminated  by  the  sword  of  the  elect.  He 
also  developed  communistic  ^'iews,  and  maintained  that  lords  who  with- 
held from  the  community  the  fish  in  the  water,  fowl  of  the  air,  and 
produce  of  the  soil  were  breaking  the  commandment  not  to  steal. 
Property  in  fact,  though  it  was  left  to  a  more  modern  communist  to 
point  the  epigram,  was  theft.  The  Elector  Frederick  would  have 
tolerated  even  this  doctrine  :  but  his  brother  Duke  John  and  his  cousin 
Duke  George  secured  in  July,  1.524.  Miinzer's  expulsion  from  Allstedt. 
He  found  an  asylum  in  the  imperial  city  of  Miihlhausen,  where  a  runaway 
monk,  Heinrich  Pfeiffer,  had  already  raised  the  small  trades  against  the 
aristocratic  CouncU  ;  but  two  months  later  the  Council  expelled  them 
both,  and  in  September  ISIiinzer  began  a  missionary  tour  through  south- 
western Germany. 

Its  effects  were  probably  much  slighter  than  has  usually  been 
supposed,  for  the  revolt  in  Stiihlingen  had  begun  before  Munzer  started, 
and  his  extreme  views  were  not  adopted  anywhere  except  at  Miihlhausen 
and  in  its  vicinity.  He  returned  thither  about  February,  1525.  and  by 
March  17  he  and  Pfeiffer  had  overthrown  the  Council  and  established  a 
communistic  theocracy,  an  experiment  which  allured  the  peasantry  of 
the  adjacent  districts  into  attempts  at  imitation.     Even  Erfurt  was  for 


loi'o]  Massacre  of  Weinsherg  187 

a  rluic  in  tiic  Lands  of  insurgents,  and  the  Counts  of  Hohenstein  were 
forced  to  join  their  ranks,  iliinzer  failed,  however,  to  raise  the  people 
of  ^Mansfeld,  and  there  was  considerable  friction  between  him  and 
Pfeiffer.  whose  objects  seem  to  have  been  confined  to  consolidating  the 
power  of  the  gilds  within  the  walls  of  Miihlhausen.  Miinzer's  strength 
lay  in  the  peasants  outside,  and.  when  Philip  of  Hesse  with  the  Dukes 
of  Brtmswick  and  Saxony  advanced  to  crush  the  revolt,  he  established 
his  camp  at  Frankenhausen,  some  miles  from  Muhlhausen,  while  Pfeiffer 
remained  within  the  city. 

Divisions  were  also  rife  in  the  other  insurgent  bands  :  the  more 
statesmanlike  of  the  leaders  endeavoured  to  restraiu  the  peasants' 
excesses  and  to  secure  co-operation  from  other  classes,  while  the  extremists, 
either  following  the  bent  of  their  nature  or  deliberately  counting  on  the 
effects  of  terror,  had  recourse  to  violent  measures.  The  worst  of  their 
deeds  was  the  ••  massacre  of  Weinsberg."  which  took  place  on  April  17, 
and  for  which  the  ruffian  Jackleiu  Rohrbach  was  mainly  responsible. 
In  an  attempt  to  joiu  hands  with  the  Swabian  peasants,  a  contingent 
of  the  Franconian  army  commanded  by  Metzler  attacked  Weinsberg.  a 
town  not  far  from  Heilbronn  held  by  Count  Ludwig  von  Helfenstein. 
Helf  ensteia  had  distingtiished  himself  by  his  defence  of  Stuttgart  against 
Duke  Ulrich  of  Wurttemberg,  and  by  his  rigorous  measures  against  such 
rebels  as  fell  into  his  power.  When  a  handful  of  peasants  appeared 
before  Weinsberg  and  demanded  admission  the  Count  made  a  sortie  and 
cut  them  all  down.  This  roused  their  comrades  to  fury ;  Weinsberg 
was  stormed  by  Rohrbach,  and  no  quarter  was  given  until  Metzler 
arrived  on  the  scene  and  stopped  the  slatighter.  He  granted  Rohrbach, 
however,  custody  of  the  prisoners,  consisting  of  Helfenstein  and  seventeen 
other  knights  ;  and,  against  Metzler's  orders  and  without  his  knowledge, 
the  Count  and  his  fellow-prisoners  were  early  next  morning  made  to  run 
the  gauntlet  of  peasants'  daggers  before  the  eyes  of  the  Countess,  a 
natural  daughter  of  the  Emperor  Maximilian. 

These  bloody  reprisab  were  not  typical  of  the  revolt :  they  were 
the  work  of  an  extreme  section  led  by  a  man  who  was  little  better 
than  a  criminal,  and  they  were  generally  repudiated  by  the  other 
insurgent  bands.  The  Wiirttemberg  peasants  under  Feuerbacher  dis- 
claimed all  connexion  with  the  ••  Weinsbergers,"  as  the  perpetrators  of 
the  massacre  came  to  be  called,  and  the  deed  hastened,  if  it  did  not 
cause,  a  division  among  the  revolutionary  ranks.  Gotz  von  Berlichingen, 
Wendel  Hipler,  and  Metzler,  all  men  of  comparative  moderation,  were 
chosen  leaders  of  the  insurgents  from  the  Odenwald  and  the  surrotmding 
districts :  and  they  endeavoured  on  the  one  hand  to  introduce  more 
discipline  among  the  peasants  and  on  the  other  to  moderate  their 
demands.  It  was  proposed  that  the  Twelve  Articles  should  be  reduced 
to  a  declaration  that  the  peasants  would  be  satisfied  with  the  immediate 
abolition  of  serfdom,  of  the  lesser  tithes,  and  of  death-dues,  and  would 


188  Attack  on  the  Bishop  of  Wilrzburg  [1525 

concede  the  performance  of  other  services  pending  a  definite  settlement 
which  was  to  be  reached  at  a  congress  at  Heilbronn.  By  these  con- 
cessions and  the  proposal  that  temporal  Princes  should  be  compensated 
out  of  the  wealth  of  the  clergy  for  their  loss  of  feudal  dues,  Hipler  and 
VVeigant  hoped  to  conciliate  some  at  least  of  the  Princes  ;  and  it  was 
probably  with  this  end  in  view  that  the  main  attack  of  the  rebels  was 
directed  against  the  Bishop  of  Wiirzburg. 

A  violent  opposition  to  these  suggestions  was  offered  by  the 
extremists;  their  supporters  were  threatened  with  death,  and  Feuer- 
bacher  was  deposed  from  the  command  of  the  Wiirttemberg  contingent. 
A  like  difficulty  was  experienced  in  the  effort  to  induce  military  sub> 
ordination.  Believers  in  the  equality  of  men  held  it  as  an  axiom  that 
no  one  was  better  than  another,  and  they  demanded  that  no  military 
measures  should  be  taken  without  the  previous  consent  of  the  whole 
force.  Rohrbachand  hisfriends  separated  from  the  main bod}^ probably  on 
account  of  the  selection  of  Berlichingen  as  commander  and  of  the  moder- 
ate proposals  of  Hipler,  and  pursued  an  independent  career  of  useless 
pillage.  But  while  this  violence  disgusted  many  sympathisers  with  the 
movement,  its  immediate  effect  was  to  terrorise  the  Franconian  nobles. 
Scores  of  them  joined  the  Evangelical  Brotherhood,  and  handed  over 
their  artillery  and  munitions  of  war.  Count  William  of  Henneberg 
followed  their  example,  and  the  Abbots  of  Hersfeld  and  Fulda,  the 
Bishops  of  Bamberg  and  Speier,  the  coadjutor  of  the  Bishop  of 
Wurzburg,  and  Margrave  Casimir  of  Brandenburg  were  compelled  to 
sign  the  modified  Twelve  Articles,  or  to  make  similar  concessions. 

Nearly  the  whole  of  Franconia  was  now  in  the  rebels'  hands,  and 
towards  the  end  of  April  they  began  to  concentrate  on  Wurzburg,  whose 
Bishop  was  also  Duke  of  Franconia  and  the  most  powerful  Prince  in  the 
circle.  The  city  offered  little  resistance,  and  the  Bishop  fled  to  his 
castle  on  the  neighbouring  Frauenberg.  This  was  an  almost  impregnable 
fortress ;  and  the  attempt  to  capture  it  locked  up  the  greatest  mass  of 
the  peasants'  forces  during  the  crucial  month  of  the  revolution.  It 
miglit  have  been  taken  or  induced  to  surrender  but  for  defects  in  the 
organisation  of  the  besieging  army.  There  was  little  subordination  to 
the  leaders  or  unity  in  their  councils.  Some  were  in  favour  of  offering 
terms,  but  Geyer  opposed  so  lukewarm  a  measure.  The  peasants 
obtained  a  fresh  accession  of  strength  by  the  formal  entry  of  Rothenburg 
into  the  Evangelical  Brotherhood  on  May  14,  but  on  the  following  night, 
during  the  absence  of  their  ablest  commanders,  the  besiegers  made  an 
attempt  to  storm  the  castle  which  was  repulsed  with  considerable  loss. 

Irretrievable  disasters  were  meanwhile  overtaking  the  peasants  in 
other  quarters  of  Germany.  On  the  day  after  the  failure  to  storm  the 
Frauenberg  was  fought  the  battle  of  Frankenhausen,  which  put  an  end 
to  the  revolt  in  Thuringia.  The  dominions  of  Philip  of  Hesse  had 
been  less  affected  by  the  movement  than  those  of  his  neighbours,  mainl}'- 


1525]  Defeats  of  the  jjeasants  189 

because  his  government  had  been  less  oppressive ;  and,  though  there 
were  disturbances,  his  readiness  to  make  concessions  soon  pacified  them, 
and  he  was  able  to  come  to  the  assistance  of  less  fortunate  Princes. 
Joining  forces  with  the  Dukes  of  Brunswick  and  Duke  John  of  Saxony, 
who  succeeded  his  brother  Frederick  as  Elector  of  Saxony  on  May  5, 
Philip  attacked  Miinzer  at  Frankenhausen  on  the  15th.  According  to 
Melanchthon,  whose  diatribe  against  Miinzer  has  been  usually  accepted 
as  the  chief  authority  for  the  battle,  the  prophet  guaranteed  his  followers 
immunity  from  the  enemy's  bullets,  and  they  stood  still  singing  hymns 
as  the  Princes'  onslaught  commenced.  But  their  inaction  seems  also  to 
have  been  due  in  part  at  least  to  the  agitation  of  some  of  the  insurgents 
for  surrender.  In  any  case  there  was  scarcely  a  show  of  resistance ;  a 
brief  cannonade  demolished  the  line  of  waggons  which  they  had,  after 
the  fashion  of  the  Hussites,  drawn  up  for  their  defence,  and  a  few 
minutes  later  the  whole  force  was  in  flight.  Miinzer  himself  was  cap- 
tured, and  after  torture  and  imprisonment  wrote  a  letter,  the  genuine- 
ness of  which  has  been  doubted,  admitting  his  errors  and  the  justice  of 
his  condemnation  to  death.  Pfeiffer  and  his  party  in  Miihlhausen  were 
now  helpless,  and  their  appeals  to  the  Franconian  insurgents,  which 
fell  upon  deaf  ears,  would  in  any  case  have  been  unavailing.  On  the 
2-4th  Pfeiffer  escaped  from  the  city,  which  thereupon  surrendered :  he 
was  overtaken  near  Eisenach,  and  met  his  inevitable  fate  with  more 
courage  than  Miinzer  had  shown.  A  like  measure  was  meted  out  to 
the  Burgomaster,  Miihlhausen  itself  was  deprived  of  its  privileges  as  a 
free  imperial  city,  and  the  revolt  was  easily  suppressed  at  Erfurt  and  in 
other  Thuringian  districts. 

The  peasants  had  been  crushed  in  the  North,  and  they  fared  as  ill  in 
the  South.  Truchsess,  after  his  truce  with  the  Donauried,  the  Allgau, 
and  the  Lake  contingents,  had  turned  in  the  last  week  in  April  against 
the  Black  Forest  bands,  when  he  was  ordered  by  the  Swabian  League  to 
march  to  the  relief  of  Wiirttemberg,  and  so  prevent  a  junction  between 
the  Franconian  and  Swabian  rebels.  On  May  12  he  came  upon  the 
peasants  strongly  entrenched  on  marshy  ground  near  Boblingen.  By 
means  of  an  understanding  with  some  of  the  leading  burghers  the  gates 
of  the  town  were  opened,  and  Truchsess  was  enabled  to  plant  artillery 
on  the  castle  walls,  whence  it  commanded  the  peasants'  entrenchments. 
Compelled  thus  to  come  out  into  the  open,  they  were  cut  to  pieces  by 
cavalry,  though,  with  a  courage  which  the  peasants  had  not  hitherto 
displayed,  the  Wiirttemberg  band  prolonged  its  resistance  for  nearly 
four  hours.  Weinsberg  next  fell  into  Truchsess'  hands  and  was  burned 
to  the  ground,  and  Rohrbach  was  slowly  roasted  to  death. 

Truchsess'  approach  spread  consternation  in  the  camp  at  Wiirzburg. 
After  the  failure  to  storm  the  Frauenberg,  Gotz  von  Berlichingen 
deserted  the  peasants'  cause,  and  about  a  fourth  of  his  men  returned  to 
their  homes.    The  remainder  were  detached  from  the  camp  at  Wiirzburg 


190  Siippression  of  the  rebellion  [1525-6 

to  intercept  Truclisess ;  they  met  him  on  June  2  at  Konigshofen  and 
suffered  a  defeat  ahuost  as  disastrous  as  that  at  Boblingen.  Truchsess 
next  fell  upon  Florian  Geyer  and  his  "  Black  Band,"  who  made  a 
stubborn  defence  at  Ingolstadt,  but  were  outnumbered  and  most  of  them 
slain.  Geyer  escaped  for  the  time,  but  met  his  death  by  fair  means 
or  foul  shortly  afterwards  at  the  hands  of  Wilhelm  von  Grumbach. 
Truchsess  could  now  march  on  Wiirzburg  without  fear  of  molestation; 
the  outskirts  were  reached  on  June  5,  and  the  leaders  of  the  old  city 
Council  entered  into  communication  with  the  approaching  enemy. 
They  conceded  practically  all  the  reactionary  demands,  but  represented 
to  the  citizens  that  they  had  made  the  best  terms  they  could ;  and  on 
June  8  Truchsess  and  the  Princes  rode  into  the  city  without  opposition. 

The  surrender  of  Wiirzburg  carried  with  it  the  relief  of  the  hard- 
pressed  castle  of  Frauenberg,  and,  the  neck  of  the  rebellion  being  thus 
ijroken,  its  life  in  other  parts  gradually  flickered  out.  Rothenburg  was 
captured  by  Margrave  Casimir  on  June  28,  but  Carlstadt  and  several 
other  revolutionary  leaders  escaped.  Memmingen  was  taken  by  strata- 
gem, and  few  of  the  cities  showed  any  disposition  to  resist.  The  move- 
ment in  Elsass  had  been  suppressed  by  Duke  Anthony  of  Lorraine  with 
the  help  of  foreign  mercenaries  before  the  end  of  May,  and  by  July  the 
only  districts  in  which  large  forces  of  the  peasants  remained  in  arms 
were  the  Allgau,  Salzburg,  and  Ferdinand's  duchies.  Truchsess,  having 
crushed  the  revolt  in  Franconia,  returned  to  complete  the  work  which 
had  been  interrupted  in  Upper  Swabia.  With  the  aid  of  George  von 
Frundsberg,  who  had  returned  from  Italy,  and  by  means  of  treachery  in 
the  peasants'  ranks,  he  dispersed  two  of  the  Allgau  bands  on  July  22,  and 
compelled  a  third  to  surrender  on  the  banks  of  the  Luibas.  A  week  before 
Count  Felix  von  Werdenberg  had  defeated  the  Hegau  contingent  at  Hil- 
zingen,  relieved  Radolfzell,  and  beheaded  Hans  Mliller  of  Bulgenbach. 

In  the  Austrian  territories  and  in  Salzburg,  however,  the  revolution 
continued  active  throughout  the  winter  and  following  spring.  Waldshut, 
which  had  risen  against  Ferdinand's  religious  persecution  before  the 
outbreak  of  the  Peasants'  War,  held  out  until  December  12,  1525.  The 
revolt  in  Salzburg  was  indirectly  encouraged  by  the  jealousy  existing 
between  its  Archbishop  and  the  Dukes  of  Bavaria,  and  by  a  scheme  which 
Ferdinand  entertained  of  dividing  the  archbishop's  lands  between  the 
two  Dukes  and  himself.  The  Archduke  had  in  June,  1525,  temporarily 
pacified  the  Tyrolese  peasantry  by  promising  a  complete  amnesty  and 
granting  some  substantial  redress  of  their  agrarian,  and  even  of  their 
ecclesiastical,  grievances.  But  Michael  Gaismayr  and  others,  who  aimed 
at  a  political  revolution,  were  not  satisfied,  and  Gaismayr  fled  to 
Switzerland,  where  he  received  promises  of  support  from  Francis  I  and 
other  enemies  of  the  Habsburgs.  Early  in  1526  he  returned  to  the 
attack  and  in  May  laid  siege  to  Radstadt.  At  Schladming,  some  fifteen 
miles  to  the  east  of  Radstadt,  the  peasants  defeated  Dietrichstein  and 


1526-8]  Results  of  the  Peasants^  Revolt  191 

for  some  months  defied  the  Austrian  government.  Gaismayr  inflicted 
two  reverses  upon  the  forces  sent  to  relieve  Radstadt,  but  was  unable 
permanently  to  resist  the  increasing  contingents  despatched  against  him 
by  the  Swabian  League  and  the  Austrian  government.  In  July  he  was 
compelled  to  raise  the  siege,  and  fled  to  Italy,  where  he  was  murdered 
in  1528  by  two  Spaniards,  who  received  for  their  deed  the  price  put  by 
the  government  on  Gaismayrs  head. 

The  Austrian  duchies  were  one  of  the  few  districts  in  which  the  re- 
volt resulted  in  an  amelioration  of  the  lot  of  the  peasants.  Margrave 
Philip  of  Baden,  whose  humanity  was  recognised  on  all  sides,  pursued  a 
similar  policy,  and  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse  also  made  some  concessions. 
But  as  a  rule  the  suppression  of  the  movement  was  marked  by  appal- 
ling atrocities.  On  May  27  Leonard  von  Eck,  the  Bavarian  chancellor, 
reports  that  Duke  Anthony  of  Lorraine  alone  had  already  destroyed 
twenty  thousand  peasants  in  Elsass  ;  and  for  the  whole  of  Germany  a 
moderate  estimate  puts  the  number  of  victims  at  a  hundred  thousand. 
The  only  consideration  that  restrained  the  victors  appears  to  have  been 
the  fear  that,  unless  they  held  their  hand,  they  would  have  no  one  left  to 
render  them  service.  "  If  all  the  peasants  are  killed,"  wrote  Margrave 
George  to  his  brother  Casimir,  "  where  shall  we  get  other  peasants  to 
make  provision  for  us  ?  "  Casimir  stood  in  need  of  the  exhortation  ;  at 
Kitzingen,  near  Wiirzburg,  he  put  out  the  eyes  of  fifty-nine  townsfolk, 
and  forbade  the  rest  under  severe  penalties  to  offer  them  medical  or 
other  assistance.  When  the  massacre  of  eighteen  knights  at  Weinsberg 
is  adduced  as  proof  that  the  peasants  were  savages,  one  may  well  ask 
what  stage  of  civilisation  had  been  reached  by  German  Princes. 

The  effects  of  this  failure  to  deal  with  the  peasants'  grievances  except 
by  methods  of  brutal  oppression  cannot  be  estimated  with  any  exacti- 
tude ;  but  its  effects  were  no  doubt  enduring  and  disastrous.  The  Diet 
of  Augsburg  in  1525  attempted  to  mitigate  the  ferocity  of  the  lords 
towards  their  subjects,  but  the  effort  did  not  produce  much  result,  and 
to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  German  peasantry  remained 
the  most  wretched  in  Europe.  Serfdom  lingered  there  longer  than  in 
any  other  civilised  country  save  Russia,  and  tlie  mass  of  the  people 
were  effectively  shut  out  from  the  sphere  of  political  action.  The  begin- 
nings of  democracy  were  crushed  in  the  cities  ;  the  knights  and  then 
the  peasants  were  beaten  down.  And  only  the  territorial  power  of  the 
Princes  profited.  The  misery  of  the  mass  of  her  people  must  be  reck- 
oned as  one  of  the  causes  of  the  national  weakness  and  intellectual 
sterility  which  marked  Germany  during  the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth 
century.  The  religious  lead  which  she  had  given  to  Europe  passed  into 
other  hands,  and  the  literary  awakening  which  preceded  and  accompa- 
nied the  Reformation  was  followed  by  slumbers  at  least  as  profound  as 
those  which  had  gone  before. 

The  difficulty  of  assigning  reasons  for  the  failure  of  the  revolt  itself 


192       Character  and  effects  of  the  Peasants'  Revolt 

is  enhanced  by  that  of  determining  how  far  it  was  really  a  revolutionary 
movement  and  how  far  reactionary.  Was  it  the  last  and  greatest  of 
the  medieval  peasant  revolts,  or  was  it  a  premature  birth  of  modern 
democracy  ?  It  was  probably  a  combination  of  both.  The  hardships 
of  the  peasants  and  town  proletariate  were  undoubtedly  aggravated  by 
the  economic  revolution,  the  substitution  of  a  world-market  for  local 
markets,  the  consequent  growth  of  capitalism  and  of  the  relative  poverty 
of  the  poorest  classes  ;  and,  in  so  far  as  they  saw  no  remedy  except  in  a 
return  to  the  worn-out  medieval  system,  their  objects  were  reactionar}-, 
and  would  have  failed  ultimately,  even  if  they  had  achieved  a  temporary 
success.  On  the  other  hand,  the  ideas  which  their  leaders  developed 
during  the  course  of  the  movement,  such  as  the  abolition  of  serfdom, 
the  participation  of  peasants  in  politics,  the  universal  apj)lication  of 
the  principle  of  election,  were  undeniably  revolutionary  and  premature. 
Many  of  these  ideas  have  been  since  successfully  put  into  practice,  but 
in  1525  the  classes  which  formulated  them  had  not  acquired  the  faculties 
necessary  for  the  proper  exercise  of  political  power  ;  and  the  movement 
was  an  abortion. 

The  effect  of  its  suppression  upon  the  religious  development  of 
Germany  w^as  none  the  less  disastrous.  In  its  religious  aspect  the 
Peasants'  Revolt  was  an  appeal  of  the  poor  and  oppressed  to  "  divine 
justice  "  against  the  oppressor.  They  had  eagerly  applied  to  their  lords 
the  biblical  anathemas  against  the  rich,  and  interpreted  the  beatitudes 
as  a  promise  of  redress  for  the  wrongs  of  the  poor.  They  were  naturally 
unconvinced  by  Luther's  declarations  that  the  Gospel  only  guaranteed  a 
spiritual  and  not  a  temporal  emancipation,  and  that  spiritual  liberty  was 
the  only  kind  of  freedom  to  which  they  had  a  right.  They  felt  that 
such  a  doctrine  might  suit  Luther  and  his  knightly  and  bourgeois  sup- 
porters, who  already  enjoyed  an  excessive  temporal  franchise,  but 
that  in  certain  depths  of  material  misery  the  cultivation  of  spiritual  and 
moral  welfare  was  impossible.  It  was  a  counsel  of  perfection  to  advise 
them  to  be  content  with  spiritual  solace  when  they  complained  that  they 
could  not  feed  their  bodies.  They  did  not  regard  poverty  as  compatible 
with  the  "  divine  justice  "  to  which  they  appealed  ;  and  when  their  ap- 
peal was  met  by  the  slaughter  of  a  hundred  thousand  of  their  numbers 
their  faith  in  the  new  Gospel  received  a  fatal  blow.  Their  aspirations, 
which  had  been  so  vividly  expressed  in  the  popular  literature  of  the  last 
five  years,  were  turned  into  despair,  and  they  relapsed  into  a  state  of 
mind  which  was  not  far  removed  from  materialistic  atheism.  Who 
knows,  they  asked,  what  God  is,  or  whether  there  is  a  God  ?  And  the 
minor  questions  at  issue  between  Luther  and  the  Pope  they  viewed  with 
profound  indifference. 

Such  was  the  result  of  the  Peasants'  Revolt  and  of  Luther's  inter- 
vention. His  conduct  will  always  remain  a  matter  of  controversy, 
because  its  interpretation  depends  not  so  much  upon  what  he  said  or 


1524-5]  Luther^s  attitude  towards  the  revolt  193 

left  unsaid,  as  upon  the  respective  emphasis  to  be  laid  on  the  various 
things  he  said,  and  on  the  meaning  his  words  were  likely  to  convey  to 
his  readers.  His  first  tract  on  the  subject,  written  and  published  in  the 
early  days  of  the  movement,  distributed  blame  with  an  impartial  but 
lavish  hand.  He  could  not  countenance  the  use  of  force,  but  many  of 
the  peasants'  demands  were  undeniably  just,  and  their  revolt  was  the 
vengeance  of  God  for  the  Princes'  sins.  Both  parties  could,  and  no 
doubt  did,  interpret  this  as  a  pronouncement  in  their  favour  ;  and, 
indeed,  stripped  of  its  theology,  violence,  and  rhetoric,  the  tract  was  a 
sensible  and  accurate  diagnosis  of  the  case.  But,  although  the  Princes 
may  have  deserved  his  strictures,  a  prudent  man  who  really  believed 
the  revolt  to  be  evil  would  have  refrained  from  such  attacks  at  that 
moment.  Luther,  however,  could  not  resist  the  temptation  to  attribute 
the  ruin  which  threatened  the  Princes  to  their  stiffnecked  rejection  of 
Lutheran  dogma  ;  and  his  invectives  poured  oil  on  the  flames  of  revolt. 
Its  rapid  progress  filled  him  with  genuine  terror,  and  it  is  probably 
unjust  to  ascribe  his  second  tract  merely  to  a  desire  to  be  found  on  the 
side  of  the  big  battalions.  It  appeared  in  the  middle  of  May,  1525, 
possibly  before  the  news  of  any  great  defeat  inflicted  on  the  insurgent 
bands  had  reached  him,  and  when  it  would  have  required  more  than 
Luther's  foresight  to  predict  their  speedy  collapse. 

Yet  terror  and  his  proximity  to  Thuringia,  the  scene  of  the  most 
violent  and  dangerous  form  of  the  revolt,  while  they  may  palliate, 
cannot  excuse  Luther's  efforts  to  rival  the  brutal  ferocity  of  Munzer's 
doctrines.  He  must  have  known  that  the  Princes'  victory,  if  it  came  at 
all,  would  be  bloody  enough  without  his  exhortations  to  kill  and  slay 
the  peasants  like  mad  dogs,  and  without  his  promise  of  heaven  to  those 
who  fell  in  the  holy  work.  His  sympathy  with  the  masses  seems  to  have 
been  limited  to  those  occasions  when  he  saw  in  them  a  useful  weapon 
to  hold  over  the  heads  of  his  enemies.  He  once  lamented  that  refractory 
servants  could  no  longer  be  treated  like  "  other  cattle  "  as  in  the  days  of 
the  Patriarchs  ;  and  he  joined  with  Melanchthon  and  Spalatin  in 
removing  the  scruples  of  a  Saxon  noble  with  regard  to  the  burdens  his 
tenants  bore.  "  The  ass  will  have  blows,"  he  said,  "  and  the  people  will 
be  ruled  by  force  "  ;  and  he  was  not  free  from  the  upstart's  contempt 
for  the  class  from  which  he  sprang.  His  followers  echoed  his  sentiments  ; 
Melanchthon  thought  even  serfdom  too  mild  for  stubborn  folk  like  the 
Germans,  and  maintained  that  the  master's  right  of  punishment  and  the 
servant's  duty  of  submission  should  both  be  unlimited.  It  was  little 
wonder  that  the  organisers  of  the  Lutheran  Church  afterwards  found  the 
peasants  deaf  to  their  exhortations,  or  that  Melanchthon  was  once 
constrained  to  admit  that  the  people  abhorred  himself  and  his  fellow- 
divines. 

It  is  almost  a  commonplace  with  Lutheran  writers  to  justify  Luther's 
action  on  the   ground   that   the  Peasants'    Revolt  was  revolutionary, 

C.    M.    H.    II,  13 


194      The  Reformation  in  alliance  loitli  the  Princes     [i524 

unlawful,  immoral,  wliile  the  religious  movement  was  reforming,  lawful, 
and  moral  ;  but  the  hard  and  fast  line  which  is  thus  drawn  vanishes 
on  a  closer  investigation.  The  peasants  had  no  constitutional  means 
wherewith  to  attain  their  ends,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
they  would  have  resorted  to  force  unless  force  had  been  prepared  to 
resist  them  ;  if,  as  Luther  maintained,  it  was  the  Christian's  duty  to 
tolerate  worldly  ills,  it  was  incumbent  on  Christian  Princes  as  well  as  on 
Christian  peasants  ;  and  if,  as  he  said,  the  Peasants'  Revolt  was  a  punish- 
ment divinely  ordained  for  the  Princes,  what  right  had  they  to  resist  ? 
Moreover,  the  Lutherans  themselves  were  only  content  with  constitutional 
means  so  long  as  they  proved  successful  ;  when  they  failed  Lutherans 
also  resorted  to  arms  against  their  lawful  Emperor.  Nor  was  there 
anything  in  the  peasants'  demands  more  essentially  revolutionary  thanthe 
repudiation  of  the  Pope's  authority  and  the  wholesale  appropriation  of 
ecclesiastical  property.  The  distinction  between  the  two  movements  has 
for  its  basis  the  fact  that  the  one  was  successful,  the  other  was  not ; 
while  the  Peasants'  Revolt  failed,  the  Reformation  triumphed,  and  then 
discarded  its  revolutionary  guise  and  assumed  the  respectable  garb  of 
law  and  order. 

Luther  in  fact  saved  the  Reformation  by  cutting  it  adrift  from  the 
failing  cause  of  the  peasants  and  tying  it  to  the  chariot  wheels  of  the 
triumphant  Princes.  If  he  had  not  been  the  apostle  of  revolution,  he 
had  at  least  commanded  the  army  in  which  all  the  revolutionaries 
fought.  He  had  now  repudiated  his  left  wing  and  was  forced  to  depend 
on  his  right.  The  movement  from  1521  to  1525  had  been  national,  and 
Luther  had  been  its  hero  ;  from  the  position  of  national  hero  he  now 
sank  to  be  the  prophet  of  a  sect,  and  a  sect  which  depended  for  existence 
upon  the  support  of  political  powers.  Melanchthon  admitted  that  the 
decrees  of  the  Lutheran  Church  were  merely  platonic  conclusions  without 
the  support  of  the  Princes,  and  Luther  suddenly  abandoned  his  views  on 
the  freedom  of  conscience  and  the  independence  of  the  Church.  In  1523 
he  had  proclaimed  the  duty  of  obeying  God  before  men  ;  at  the  end  of 
1524  he  was  invoking  the  secular  arm  against  the  remnant  of  papists  at 
Wittenberg  ;  it  was  to  punish  the  ungodly,  he  said,  that  the  sword  had 
been  placed  in  the  hands  of  authority,  and  it  was  in  vain  that  the 
Elector  Frederick  reminded  him  of  his  previous  teaching,  that  men 
should  let  only  the  Word  fight  for  them.  Separated  from  the  Western 
Church  and  alienated  from  the  bulk  of  the  German  people,  Lutheran 
divines  leant  upon  territorial  Princes,  and  repaid  their  support  with 
undue  servility  ;  even  Henry  VIII  extorted  from  his  bishops  no  more 
degrading  compliance  than  the  condoning  by  Melanchthon  and  others 
of  Philip  of  Hesse's  bigamy.  Melanchthon  came  to  regard  the  com- 
mands of  princes  as  the  ordinances  of  God,  while  Luther  looked  upon 
them  as  P>ishops  of  the  Church,  and  has  been  classed  by  Treitschke 
with  Machiavelli  as  a  champion  of  the  indefeasible  rights  of  the  State. 


1525]  Secularisation  of  Church  property  195 

Erastus,  like  most  political  philosophers,  only  reduced  to  theory  what 
had  long  been  the  practice  of  Princes. 

This  alliance  of  Lutheran  State  and  Lutheran  Church  was  based  on 
mutual  interest.  Some  of  the  peasant  leaders  had  offered  the  Princes 
compensation  for  the  loss  of  their  feudal  dues  out  of  the  revenues  of  the 
Church.  The  Lutherans  offered  them  both  ;  they  favoured  the  retention 
of  feudal  dues  and  the  confiscation  of  ecclesiastical  property ;  and  the 
latter  could  only  be  satisfactorily  effected  through  the  intervention  of  the 
territorial  principle,  for  neither  religious  party  would  have  tolerated 
the  acquisition  by  the  Emperor  of  the  ecclesiastical  territories  within 
the  Empire.  Apart  from  the  alleged  evils  inherent  in  the  wealth  of  the 
clergy,  secularisation  of  Church  property  was  recommended  on  the 
ground  that  many  of  the  duties  attached  to  it  had  already  passed  to 
some  extent  under  State  or  municipal  supervision,  such  as  the  regulation 
of  poor  relief  and  of  education  ;  and  the  history  of  the  fifteenth  century 
had  shown  that  the  defence  of  Christendom  depended  solely  upon  the 
exertions  of  individual  States,  and  that  the  Church  could  no  longer,  as 
in  the  days  of  the  Crusades,  excite  any  independent  enthusiasm  against 
the  infidel.  It  was  on  the  plea  of  the  necessities  of  this  defence  that 
Catholic  as  well  as  Lutheran  princes  made  large  demands  upon 
ecclesiastical  revenues.  With  the  diminution  of  clerical  goods  went  a 
decline  in  the  independence  of  the  clergy  and  a  corresponding  increase 
in  the  authority  of  territorial  Princes ;  and  it  was  by  the  prospect  of 
reducing  his  Bishops  and  priests  to  subjection  that  sovereigns  like 
Margrave  Casimir  of  Brandenburg  were  induced  to  adopt  the  Lutheran 
cause. 

The  Lutherans  had  need  of  every  recruit,  for  the  reaction  which 
crushed  the  peasants  threatened  to  involve  them  in  a  similar  ruin. 
Duke  Anthony  of  Lorraine  regarded  the  suppression  of  the  revolt  in  the 
light  of  a  crusade  against  Luther,  and  many  a  Gospel  preacher  was 
summarily  executed  on  a  charge  of  sedition  for  which  there  was  slender 
ground.  Catholic  Princes  felt  that  they  would  never  be  secure  against  a 
recurrence  of  rebellion  until  they  had  extirpated  the  root  of  the  evil ; 
and  the  embers  of  social  strife  were  scarcely  stamped  out  when  they 
began  to  discuss  schemes  for  extinguishing  heresy.  In  July,  1525, 
Duke  George  of  Saxony,  who  may  have  entertained  hopes  of  seizing  his 
cousin's  electorate,  the  Electors  Joachim  of  Brandenburg  and  Albrecht  of 
Mainz,  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel,  and  other  Catholic 
Princes  met  at  Dessau  to  consider  a  Catholic  League,  and  Henry  of 
Brunswick  was  sent  to  Charles  to  obtain  the  imperial  support.  The 
danger  produced  a  like  combination  of  Lutherans,  and  in  October,  1525» 
Philip  of  Hesse  proposed  a  defensive  alliance  between  himself  and  Elector 
John  at  Torgau ;  it  was  completed  at  Gotha  in  the  following  March,  and 
at  Magdeburg  it  was  joined  by  that  city,  the  Brunswick-Liineburg  Dukes, 
Otto,  Ernest,  and  Francis,  Duke  Philip  of   Brunswick-Grubenhagen, 


196  Rival  Leagues. — Diet  of  Speier  [1525-6 

Duke  Henry  of  Mecklenburg,  Prince  Wolfgang  of  Anlialt-Kotlien,  and 
Counts  Gebhard  and  Albrecht  of  Mansfeld. 

This  league  was  the  work  of  Philip  of  Hesse,  the  statesman  to  whom 
the  Reformation  in  Germany  largely  owed  its  success;  his  genuine 
adoption  of  its  doctrines  had  little  effect  on  his  personal  morality,  yet  he 
risked  his  all  in  the  cause  and  devoted  to  it  abilities  of  a  very  high  order. 
But  for  his  slender  means  and  narrow  domains  he  might  have  played  a 
great  part  in  history ;  as  it  was,  his  courage,  fertility  of  resource,  wide 
outlook,  and  independence  of  formulas  enabled  him  to  exert  a  powerful 
influence  on  the  fortunes  of  his  creed  and  his  country.  He  already 
meditated  a  scheme,  which  he  afterwards  carried  into  effect,  of  restoring 
Duke  Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg ;  and  the  skill  with  which  he  played  on 
Bavarian  jealousy  of  the  Habsburgs  more  than  once  saved  the  Reformers 
from  a  Catholic  combination.  He  wished  to  include  in  the  league  the 
half-Zwinglian  cities  of  South  Germany,  and  although  his  far-reaching 
scheme  for  a  union  between  Zwinglian  Switzerland  and  Lutheran 
Germany  was  baulked  by  Luther's  obstinacy  and  Zwingli's  defeat  at 
Kappel,  he  looked  as  early  as  1526  for  help  to  the  Northern  Powers 
which  eventually  saved  the  Reformation  in  the  course  of  the  Thirty 
Years'  War. 

Meanwhile  a  Diet  summoned  to  meet  at  Augsburg  in  December,  1525, 
was  scantily  attended  and  proved  abortive.  Another  met  at  Speier  in 
the  following  June,  and  its  conduct  induced  a  Reformer  to  describe  it  as 
the  boldest  and  freest  Diet  that  ever  assembled.  The  old  complaints 
against  Rome  were  revived,  and  the  recent  revolt  was  attributed  to 
clerical  abuses.  A  committee  of  Princes  reported  in  favour  of  the 
marriage  of  priests,  communion  in  both  kinds,  the  abolition  of  private 
masses,  a  reduction  in  the  number  of  fasts,  the  joint  use  of  Latin  and 
German  in  baptismal  services  and  in  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist, 
and  the  interpretation  of  Scripture  by  Scripture.  To  prevent  the 
adoption  of  these  resolutions  Ferdinand  produced  instructions  from  the 
Emperor,  dated  the  23rd  of  March,  1526,  in  which  he  forbade  innovations, 
promised  to  discuss  the  question  of  a  General  Council  with  the  Pope, 
and  demanded  the  execution  of  the  Edict  of  Worms.  The  cities,  how- 
ever, again  declared  the  last  to  be  impracticable,  and  called  attention 
to  the  fact  that,  whereas  at  the  date  of  Charles'  letter  he  had  been  at 
peace  with  the  Pope,  they  were  now  at  open  enmity.  They  declined  to 
believe  that  the  Emperor's  intentions  remained  the  same  under  these 
altered  conditions ;  and  they  proposed  sending  a  dejiutation  to  Spain  to 
demand  the  suspension  of  the  Edict  of  Worms,  and  the  immediate 
convocation  of  a  General  or  at  least  a  National  Council.  Meanwhile  the 
Princes  suggested  that  as  regarded  matters  of  faith  each  Prince  should  so 
conduct  himself  as  he  could  answer  for  his  behaviour  to  God  and  to  the 
Emperor  ;  and  this  proposal  was  adopted,  was  promulgated  in  the  Diet's 
Recess,  and  thus  became  the  law  of  the  Empire.     Both  the  Emperor  and 


1526-7]  Charles  V  and  Clement  VII  197 

the  national  government  seemed  to  have  abdicated  their  control  over 
ecclesiasticalpolicyinfavourof  the  territorial  Princes  ;  and  the  separatist 
principle,  which  had  long  dominated  secular  politics,  appeared  to  have 
legally  established  itself  within  the  domain  of  religion. 

The  Diet  had  presumed  too  much  upon  Charles'  hostility  to  the 
Pope,  but  there  were  grounds  for  this  assumption.  Although  his  letter 
arrived  too  late  to  affect  the  Diet's  decision,  the  Emperor  had  actually 
written  on  July  27,  suggesting  the  abolition  of  the  penal  clauses  in  the 
Edict  of  Worms,  and  the  submission  of  evangelical  doctrines  to  the 
consideration  of  a  General  Council.  But  this  change  of  attitude  was 
entirely  due  to  the  momentary  exigencies  of  his  foreign  relations. 
Clement  VIl  was  hand  in  glove  with  the  League  of  Cognac,  formed  to 
wrest  from  Charles  the  fruits  of  Pavia.  The  Emperor,  threatened  with 
excommunication,  replied  by  remarking  that  Luther  might  be  made  a  man 
of  importance ;  while  Charles'  lieutenant,  Moncada,  captured  the  castle 
of  St  Angelo,  and  told  the  Pope  that  God  himself  could  not  withstand 
the  victorious  imperial  arms.  Other  Spaniards  were  urging  Charles  to 
abolish  the  temporal  power  of  the  Papacy,  as  the  root  of  all  the  Italian 
wars  ;  and  he  hoped  to  find  in  the  Lutherans  a  weapon  against  the  Pope, 
a  hope  which  was  signally  fulfilled  when  Frundsberg  led  eleven  thousand 
troops,  four  thousand  of  whom  served  without  pay,  to  the  sack  of  Rome. 

Moreover  Ferdinand  was  in  no  position  to  coerce  the  Lutheran 
princes.  The  peasant  revolts  in  his  Austrian  duchies  were  not  yet 
subdued,  and  he  was  toying  with  the  idea  of  an  extensive  secularisation  of 
ecclesiastical  property.  He  had  seized  the  bishopric  of  Brixen,  meditated 
a  partition  of  Salzburg,  and  told  his  Estates  at  Innsbruck  that  the 
common  people  objected  altogether  to  the  exercise  of  clerical  jurisdiction 
in  temporal  concerns.  And  before  long  considerations  of  the  utmost 
importance  for  the  future  of  his  House  and  of  Europe  further  diverted 
his  energies  from  the  prosecution  of  either  religious  or  political  objects 
in  Germany;  for  1526  was  the  birth-year  of  the  Austro-Hungarian 
State  which  now  holds  in  its  straining  bond  all  that  remains  of  Habsburg 
power. 

The  ruin  which  overtook  the  kingdom  of  Hungary  at  Mohacs 
(August  30,  1526)  has  been  ascribed  to  various  causes.  The  simplest 
is  that  Hungary,  and  no  other  State,  barred  the  path  of  the  Turks,  and 
felt  the  full  force  of  their  onslaught  at  a  time  when  the  Ottoman  Power 
was  in  the  first  flush  of  its  vigour,  and  was  wielded  by  perhaps  the  greatest 
of  Sultans.  Hungary,  though  divided,  was  at  least  as  united  as  Germany 
or  Italy ;  it  was  to  some  extent  isolated  from  the  rest  of  Europe,  but  it 
effected  no  such  breach  with  Western  Christendom  as  Bohemia  had  done 
in  the  Hussite  wars,  and  Bohemia  escaped  the  heel  of  the  Turk.  The 
foreign  policy  of  Hungary  was  ill-directed  and  inconsequent ;  but  if  the 
marriage  of  its  King  with  the  Emperor's  sister  and  that  of  its  Princess 


198  John  Zapolya  in  Hungary  [i526 

with  his  brother  could  not  protect  it,  the  weaving  of  diplomatic  webs 
would  not  have  impeded  the  Turkish  advance.  No  Hungarian  wizard 
could  liave  revived  the  Crusades  ;  and  Hungary  fell  a  victim  not  so  much 
to  faults  of  her  own,  as  to  the  misfortune  of  her  geographical  position, 
and  to  the  absorption  of  Christian  Europe  in  its  internecine  warfare. 

But  Hungary's  necessity  was  the  Habsburgs'  opportunity.  For  at 
least  a  century  that  ambitious  race  had  dreamt  of  the  union  of  Austria, 
Bohemia,  and  Hungary  under  its  sway.  Under  Albrecht  II  and  his  son 
Wladislav  the  dream  enjoyed  a  twenty  years'  realisation  (1437-57)  ; 
but  after  the  latter's  death  Bohemia  found  a  national  King  in  Podiebrad 
and  Hungary  in  Corvinus.  On  the  extinction  of  these  two  lines  the 
realms  were  again  united,  but  not  under  Austrian  rule ;  and  for  more 
than  a  generation  two  Polish  princes  of  the  House  of  Jagello  successively 
sat  on  the  Cech  and  Magyar  thrones.  The  Emperor  Maximilian, 
however,  never  ceased  to  grasp  at  the  chance  which  his  feeble  father  had 
missed  ;  and  before  his  death  two  of  his  grandchildren  were  betrothed  to 
Louis  II  and  his  sister  Anna,  while  the  Austrian  succession,  in  default  of 
issue  to  Louis,  was  secured  by  solemn  engagements  on  the  part  of  both 
the  kingdoms. 

The  death  of  Louis  at  Mohacs  hastened  the  crucial  hour.  Both 
kingdoms  prided  themselves  on  their  independence  and  right  to  elect 
their  monarchs,  and  in  both  there  was  national  antagonism  to  German 
encroachment.  In  Hungary,  where  the  Reformation  had  made  some 
slight  progress,  the  Catholic  national  party  was  led  by  John  Zapolya, 
who  had  earned  a  reputation  by  his  cruel  suppression  of  a  Hungarian 
peasant  revolt  in  1514,  and  had  eagerly  sought  the  hand  of  the  Princess 
Anna.  His  object  throughout  had  been  the  throne,  and  the  marriage 
of  Anna  to  Ferdinand  enraged  him  to  such  an  extent  that  he  stood  idly 
by  while  the  Turk  triumphed  over  his  country  at  Mohacs.  He  would 
rather  be  King  b}^  the  grace  of  Solyman  than  see  Hungary  free  under 
Ferdinand.  The  nobles'  hatred  of  German  rule  came  to  Zapolya's  aid, 
and  on  November  10, 1526,  disregarding  alike  Ferdinand's  claims  through 
his  wife  and  their  previous  treaty-engagements,  they  chose  Zapolya 
King  at  Stuhlweissenburg,  and  crowned  him  the  following  day. 

Had  Ferdinand  had  only  one  rival  to  fear  in  Bohemia  the  result  might 
have  been  similar,  but  a  multitude  of  candidates  divided  the  opposition. 
Sigismund  of  Poland,  Joachim  of  Brandenburg,  Albrecht  of  Prussia, 
three  Saxon  Princes,  and  two  Bavarian  Dukes,  all  thought  of  entering  the 
lists,  but  Ferdinand's  most  serious  competitors  were  his  Wittelsbach 
rivals,  who  had  long  intrigued  for  the  Bohemian  throne.  But  if  the 
Cechswere  to  electa  German  King,  a  Wittelsbach  possessedno advantages 
over  a  Habsburg,  and  Ferdinand  carried  the  day  at  Prague  on  October  23, 
1526.  The  theory  that  he  owed  his  success  to  a  Catholicism  which  was 
moderate  compared  with  that  of  the  Bavarian  Dukes  ignores  the  Catholic 
reaction  which  had  followed  the  Hussite  movement ;  and  the  Articles 


1526-7]  Election  of  Ferdinand  in  Bohemia  and  Hangary    199 

submitted  to  Ferdinand  by  his  future  subjects  expressly  demanded  the 
prohibition  of  clerical  marriages,  the  maintenance  of  fasts,  and  the 
veneration  of  Saints.  Of  course,  like  his  predecessors,  he  had  to  sign 
the  compactata  extorted  by  the  Bohemians  from  the  Council  of  Basel  and 
still  unconfirmed  by  the  Pope,  but  this  was  no  great  concession  to  heresy, 
and  Ferdinand  showed  much  firmness  in  refusing  stipulations  which 
would  have  weakened  his  royal  authority.  In  spite  of  the  hopes  which 
his  adversaries  built  on  this  attitude  he  was  crowned  with  acclamation 
at  Prague  on  February  24,  1527,  the  anniversary  of  Pavia  and  of 
Charles  V's  birth. 

He  then  turned  his  attention  to  Hungary ;  his  widowed  sister's 
exertions  had  resulted  in  an  assemblage  of  nobles  which  elected 
Ferdinand  King  at  Pressburg  on  December  17,  1526 ;  and  the  eii'orts 
of  Francis  I  and  the  Pope,  of  England  and  Venice,  to  strengthen 
Zapolya's  party  proved  vain.  During  the  f  olloAving  summer  Ferdinand 
was  recognised  as  King  by  another  Diet  at  Bud  a,  defeated  Zapolya  at 
Tokay,  and  on  November  3  was  crowned  at  Stuhlweissenburg,  the  scene 
of  his  rival's  election  in  the  previous  year.  This  rapid  success  led  him 
to  indulge  in  dreams  which  later  Habsburgs  succeeded  in  fulfilling. 
Besides  the  prospect  of  election  as  King  of  the  Romans,  he  hoped  to 
secure  the  duchy  of  Milan  and  to  regain  for  Hungary  its  lost  province 
of  Bosnia.  Ferdinand  might  also  be  thought  to  have  foreseen  the 
future  importance  of  the  events  of  1526-7,  and  the  part  which  his 
conglomerate  kingdom  was  to  play  in  the  history  of  Europe. 

These  diversions  of  Ferdinand,  and  the  absorption  of  Charles  V  in  his 
wars  in  Italy  and  with  England  and  France,  afforded  the  Lutherans  an 
opportunity  of  turning  the  Recess  of  Speier  to  an  account  which  the 
Habsburgs  and  the  Catholic  Princes  had  certainly  never  contemplated.  In 
their  anxiety  to  discover  a  constitutional  and  legal  plea  which  should  re- 
move from  the  Reformation  the  reproach  of  being  a  revolution,  Lutheran 
historians  have  attempted  to  differentiate  this  Recess  from  other  laws  of 
the  Empire,  and  to  regard  it  rather  as  a  treaty  between  two  independent 
Powers,  which  neither  could  break  without  the  other's  consent,  than  as  a 
law  which  might  be  repealed  b}^  a  simple  majority  of  the  Estates.  It  was 
represented  as  a  fundamental  part  of  the  constitution  beyond  the  reach 
of  ordinary  constitutional  weapons  ;  and  the  neglect  of  the  Emperor  and 
the  Catholic  majority  to  adopt  this  view  is  urged  as  a  legal  justification 
of  that  final  resort  to  arms,  on  the  successful  issue  of  which  the  existence 
of  Protestantism  within  the  Empire  was  really  based. 

It  is  safe  to  affirm  that  no  such  idea  had  occurred  to  the  majority  of 
the  Diet  which  passed  the  Recess.  The  Emperor  and  the  Catholic 
Princes  had  admitted  the  inexpediency  and  impracticability  of  reducing 
Germany  at  that  juncture  to  religious  conformity ;  but  they  had  by  no 
means  forsworn  an  attempt  in  the  future  when  circumstances  might 


200  Development  of  the  Lutheran  Church         [1526-7 

prove  more  propitious.  Low  as  the  central  authority  had  fallen  before 
the  onslaughts  of  territorial  separatists,  it  was  not  yet  prepared  to  admit 
that  the  question  of  the  nation's  religion  had  for  ever  escaped  its  control. 
But  for  the  moment  it  was  compelled  to  look  on  while  individual  Princes 
organised  Churches  at  will ;  and  the  majority  had  to  content  themselves 
with  replying  to  Lutheran  expulsion  of  Catholic  doctrine  by  enforcing 
it  still  more  rigorously  in  their  several  spheres  of  influence. 

The  right  to  make  ecclesiastical  ordinances,  which  the  Empire  had 
exercised  at  Worms  in  1521  and  at  Niirnberg  in  1523  and  1524,  but  had 
temporarily  abandoned  at  Speier,  was  not  restored  to  the  Church,  but 
passed  to  the  territorial  Princes,  in  whose  hostility  to  clerical  privileges 
and  projDcrty  Luther  found  his  most  effective  support.  Hence  the 
democratic  form  of  Church  government,  which  had  been  elaborated  by 
Francois  Lambert  and  adopted  by  a  synod  summoned  to  Homberg  by 
Philip  of  Hesse  in  October,  1526,  failed  to  take  root  in  Germany.  It  was 
based  on  the  theory  that  every  Christian  participates  in  the  priesthood, 
that  the  Church  consists  only  of  the  faithful,  and  that  each  religious 
community  should  have  complete  independence  and  full  powers  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline.  It  was  on  similar  lines  that  "  Free  "  Churches 
were  subsequently  developed  in  Scotland,  England,  France,  and  America. 
But  such  ideas  were  alien  to  the  absolute  monarchic  principle  with 
which  Luther  had  cast  in  his  lot,  and  the  German  Reformers,  like 
the  Anglican,  preferred  a  Church  in  which  the  sovereign  and  not  the 
congregation  was  the  summus  episcopus.  In  his  hands  were  vested  the 
powers  of  punishment  for  religious  opinion,  and  in  Germany  as  in 
England  religious  persecutions  were  organised  by  the  State.  It  was 
perhaps  as  well  that  the  State  and  not  the  Lutheran  Church  exercised 
coercive  functions,  for  the  rigour  applied  by  Lutheran  Princes  to  dissi- 
dent Catholics  fell  short  of  Luther's  terrible  imprecations,  and  of  the 
cruelties  inflicted  on  heretics  in  orthodox  territories. 

The  breach  between  the  Lutheran  Church  and  the  Church  of  Rome 
was,  with  regard  to  both  ritual  and  doctrine,  slight  compared  with  that 
effected  by  Zwingli  or  Calvin.  Latin  Christianity  was  the  groundwork 
of  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  its  divines  sought  only  to  repair  the  old 
foundation  and  not  to  lay  down  a  new.  Luther  would  tolerate  no 
figurative  interpretation  of  the  words  of  institution  of  the  Eucharist, 
and  he  stoutly  maintained  the  doctrine  of  a  real  presence,  in  his  own 
sense.  With  the  exception  of  the  "  abominable  canon,"  which  implied  a 
sacrifice,  the  Catholic  Mass  was  retained  in  the  Lutheran  Service ;  and 
on  tliis  question  every  attempt  at  union  with  the  "  Reformed  "  Churches 
broke  down.  The  changes  introduced  during  the  ecclesiastical  visitations 
of  Lutheran  Germany  in  1526-7  were  at  least  as  much  concessions  to 
secular  dislike  of  clerical  privilege  as  to  religious  antipathy  to  Catholic 
doctrine.  The  abolition  of  episcopal  jurisdiction  increased  the  in- 
dependence of  parish  priests,  but  it  enhanced  even  more  the  princely 


1524-9]  Demand  for  spiritual  liberty  201 

authority.  The  confiscation  of  monastic  property  enriched  parish 
churches  and  schools,  and  in  Hesse  facilitated  the  foundation  of  the 
University  of  Marburg,  but  it  also  swelled  the  State  exchequer  ;  and  the 
marriage  of  priests  tended  to  destroy  their  privileges  as  a  caste  and 
merge  them  in  the  mass  of  their  fellow-citizens. 

It  was  not  these  questions  of  ecclesiastical  government  or  ritual 
which  evoked  enthusiasm  for  the  Lutheran  cause.  Its  strength  lay  in  its 
appeal  to  the  conscience,  in  its  emancipation  of  the  individual  from  the 
restrictions  of  an  ancient  but  somewhat  oppressive  system,  in  its 
declaration  that  the  means  of  salvation  were  open  to  all,  and  that  neither 
priest  nor  Pope  could  take  them  away ;  that  individual  faith  was 
sufficient  and  the  whole  apparatus  of  clerical  mediation  cumbrous  and 
nugatory.  The  absolute,  immediate  dependence  on  God,  on  which 
Luther  insisted  so  strongly,  excluded  dependence  on  man  ;  and  the 
individualistic  egotism  and  quickening  conscience  of  the  age  were  alike 
exalted  by  the  sense  of  a  new-born  spiritual  liberty.  To  this  moral 
elation  Luther's  hymns  contributed  as  much  as  his  translation  of  the 
New  Testament,  and  his  musical  ear  made  them  national  songs.  The 
first  collection  was  published  in  1524,  and  Luther's  Ein  feste  Burg  ist 
miser  Grotty  written  in  1527,  has  been  described  by  Heine  as  the 
Marseillaise  of  the  Reformation;  it  was  equally  popular  as  a  song  of 
triumph  in  the  hour  of  victory  and  as  a  solace  in  persecution.  Luther  was 
still  at  work  on  his  translation  of  the  Bible,  and  his  third  great  literary 
contribution  to  the  edification  of  the  Lutheran  Church  was  his  Catechism^ 
which  appeared  in  a  longer  and  a  shorter  form  (1529),  and  in  the  latter 
became  the  norm  for  German  Churches.  The  way  for  it  had  been 
prepared  by  two  of  Luther's  disciples,  Johann  Agricola  and  Justus 
Jonas  ;  and  other  colleagues  in  the  organisation  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
were  Amsdorf,  Luther's  Elisha,Melanchthon,  whose  theological  learning, 
intellectual  acuteness,  and  forbearance  towards  the  Catholics  were  marred 
by  a  lack  of  moral  strength,  and  Bugenhagen.  The  practical  genius  of 
the  last-named  reformer  was  responsible  for  the  evangelisation  of  the 
greater  part  of  North  Germany,  which,  with  the  exception  of  the 
territories  of  the  Elector  of  Brandenburg,  of  Duke  George  of  Saxony, 
and  of  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel,  had  by  1529  broken 
away  from  the  Catholic  Church. 

But  the  respite  afforded  by  the  Diet  of  Speier,  invaluable  though 
it  proved,  was  not  of  long  duration,  and  the  Lutheran  Princes  were 
soon  threatened  with  attacks  from  their  fellow-Princes  and  from  the 
Emperor  himself.  A  meeting  between  Elector  Joachim  of  Brandenburg, 
Duke  George  of  Saxony,  and  the  Archduke  Ferdinand,  now  King  of 
Hungary  and  Bohemia,  at  Breslau  in  May,  1527,  gave  rise  to  rumours  of 
a  Catholic  conspiracy ;  and  these  suspicions,  to  which  the  Landgrave's 
hasty  temperament  led  him  to  attach  too  ready  a  credence,  were  turned 
to  account  by  one  Otto  von  Pack,  who  had  acted  as  Vice-Chancellor  of 


202     Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse  and  the  Catholics    [1527-9 

Duke  George  of  Saxony.  Pack  forged  a  document  purporting  to  be  an 
authentic  copy  of  an  offensive  league  between  Ferdinand,  the  Electors  of 
Mainz  and  Brandenburg,  Duke  George  of  Saxony,  the  Dukes  of  Bavaria, 
and  the  Bishops  of  Salzburg,  Wiirzburg,  and  Bamberg,  the  object  of 
which  was  first  to  drive  Zapolya  from  Hungary,  and  then  to  make  war 
on  the  Elector  of  Saxony  unless  he  surrendered  Luther.  For  this 
information  the  Landgrave  paid  Pack  four  thousand  crowns,  and 
despatched  him  to  Hungary  to  warn  Zapolya  and  to  concert  measures 
of  defence.  Another  envoy  was  sent  to  Francis  I  ;  and  at  Weimar  in 
March,  1528,  Philip  concluded  a  treaty  with  the  Elector  of  Saxony  in 
which  they  agreed  to  anticiiDate  the  attack.  The  Landgrave  at  once 
began  to  mobilise  his  forces,  but  Luther  persuaded  the  Elector  to  halt. 
All  the  parties  concerned  denied  the  alleged  conspiracy,  and  eventually 
Philip  himself  admitted  that  he  had  been  deceived,  lllogically,  however, 
he  demanded  that  the  Bishops  should  pay  the  cost  of  his  mobilisation ; 
and  as  they  had  no  force  wherewith  to  resist,  they  were  compelled  to  find 
a  hundred  thousand  crowns  between  them. 

The  violence  of  this  proceeding  naturally  embittered  the  Catholics, 
and  Phili23  was  charged  with  having  concocted  the  whole  plot  and 
instigated  Pack's  forgeries.  These  accusations  have  been  satisfactorily 
disproved,  but  the  Landgrave's  conduct  must  be  held  partially  respon- 
sible for  the  increased  persecution  of  Lutherans  which  followed  in 
1528,  and  for  the  hostile  attitude  of  the  Diet  of  Speier  in  1529.  The 
Catholic  States  began  to  organise  visitations  for  the  extirpation  of 
heresy;  in  Austria  printers  and  vendors  of  heretical  books  were  con- 
demned to  be  drowned  as  poisoners  of  the  minds  of  the  people.  In 
Bavaria  in  1528  thirty-eight  persons  were  burnt  or  drowned,  and  the 
victims  included  men  of  distinction  such  as  Leonhard  Kaser,  Heuglin, 
Adolf  Clarenbach,  and  Peter  Flysteden,  while  the  historian  Aventinus 
suffered  prolonged  imprisonment.  In  Brandenburg  the  most  illustrious 
victim  was  the  Elector's  wife,  the  Danish  Princess  Elizabeth,  who  only 
escaped  death  or  lifelong  incarceration  by  flight  to  her  cousin,  the 
Elector  of  Saxony. 

Meanwhile  the  Emperor's  attitude  grew  ever  more  menacing,  for  a 
fresh  revolution  had  reversed  the  imperial  policy.  The  idea  of  playing 
off  Luther  against  the  Pope  had  probably  never  been  serious,  and  the 
protests  in  Spain  against  Charles'  treatment  of  Clement  would  alone 
have  convinced  him  of  the  dangers  of  such  an  adventure.  Between 
1527  and  1529  he  gradually  reached  the  conclusion  that  a  Pope  was 
indispensable.  Immediately  after  the  Sack  of  Rome  one  of  his  agents 
had  warned  him  of  tlie  danger  lest  England  and  France  should  establish 
patriarchates  of  their  own  ;  and  a  Pope  of  the  universal  Church  under 
the  control  of  Charles  as  master  of  Italy  was  too  useful  an  instrument  to 
be  lightly  abandoned,  if  for  no  other  reason  than  that  an  insular  Pope 
in  England  would  grant  the  divorce  of  Henry  VIII  from  Catharine  of 


1528-9]  Diet  of  Speier  203 

Aragon.  The  Emperor  also  wanted  Catholic  help  to  restore  his  brother- 
in-law,  Christian  II  of  Denmark,  deposed  by  his  Lutheran  subjects  ;  he 
desired  papal  recognition  for  Ferdinand's  new  kingdoms  ;  and  his  own 
imperial  authority  in  Germany  could  not  have  survived  the  secularisation 
of  the  ecclesiastical  electorates.  Empire  and  Papacy,  said  Zwingli,  both 
emanated  from  Rome  ;  neither  could  stand  if  the  other  fell.  At  the 
same  time  the  issue  of  the  war  in  Italy  in  1528-9  convinced  Clement 
that  he  could  not  stand  without  Charles,  and  paved  the  way  for  the 
mutual  understanding  which  was  sealed  by  the  Treaty  of  Barcelona 
(June  29,  1529).  It  was  almost  a  family  compact;  the  Pope's  nephew 
was  to  marry  the  Emperor's  illegitimate  daughter,  the  Medici  tyranny 
was  to  be  re-established  in  Florence,  the  divorce  of  Catharine  to  be 
refused,  the  papal  countenance  to  be  withdrawn  from  Zapolya,  and 
Emperor  and  Pope  were  to  unite  against  Turks  and  heretics.  The 
Treaty  of  Cambray  (August  3)  soon  afterwards  released  Charles  from 
his  war  with  France  and  left  him  free  for  a  while  to  turn  his  attention 
to  Germany. 

The  growing  intimacy  between  the  Emperor  and  Pope  had  already 
smoothed  the  path  of  reaction,  and  reinforced  the  antagonism  of  the 
Catholic  majority  to  the  Lutheran  princes.  In  1528  Charles  sent  the 
Provost  of  Waldkirch  to  Germany  to  strengthen  the  Catholic  cause  ; 
Duke  Henry  of  Mecklenburg  returned  to  the  Catholic  fold ;  the  waver- 
ing Elector  Palatine  forbade  his  subjects  to  attend  the  preaching  of 
Lutherans ;  and  at  the  Diet  of  Speier,  which  met  on  February  21,  1529, 
the  Evangelicals  found  themselves  a  divided  and  hopeless  minority 
opposed  to  a  determined  and  solid  majority  of  Catholics.  Only  three 
of  their  number  were  chosen  to  sit  on  the  committee  appointed  to 
discuss  the  religious  question.  Charles  had  sent  instructions  denouncing 
the  Recess  of  1526  and  practically  dictating  the  terms  of  a  new  one. 
The  Catholics  were  not  prepared  to  admit  this  reduction  of  the  Diet 
to  the  status  of  a  machine  for  registering  imperial  rescripts ;  but  their 
modifications  were  intended  rather  to  show  their  independence  than  to 
alter  the  purport  of  Charles'  proposals,  and  their  resolutions  amounted 
to  this :  there  was  to  be  complete  toleration  for  Catholics  in  Lutheran 
States,  but  no  toleration  for  Lutherans  in  Catholic  States,  and  no 
toleration  anywhere  for  Zwinglians  and  Anabaptists ;  the  Lutherans 
were  to  make  no  further  innovations  in  their  own  dominions,  and  clerical 
jurisdictions  and  propertj^  were  to  be  inviolate. 

Tlie  differentiation  between  Lutherans  and  Zwinglians  was  a  skilful 
attempt  to  drive  a  wedge  between  the  two  sections  of  the  anti-Catholic 
party,  —  an  attempt  which  Melanchthon's  pusillanimity  nearly  brought  to 
a  successful  issue.  The  Zwinglian  party  included  the  principal  towns  of 
South  Germany  ;  but  Melanchthon  was  ready  to  abandon  them  as  the 
price  of  peace  for  the  Lutheran  Church.  Philip  of  Hesse,  however,  had 
none  of  the  theoloo-ical  narrowness  which  characterised    Luther  and 


204:  Protest  against  the  decisions  of  the  Diet  [i529 

Melanchtlion,  and,  in  a  less  degree,  even  Zwingli  ;  he  was  not  so  blind 
as  the  divines  to  the  political  necessities  of  the  situation,  and  he  managed 
to  avert  a  breach  for  the  time  ;  it  was  due  to  him  that  Strassburg  and 
Ulm,  Niirnberg  and  Memmingen,  and  other  towns  added  their  weight  to 
the  protest  against  the  decree  of  the  Diet.  Jacob  Sturm  of  Strassburg 
and  Tetzel  of  Niirnberg  were,  indeed,  the  most  zealous  champions  of  the 
Recess  of  1526  during  the  debates  of  the  Diet ;  but  their  arguments  and 
the  mediation  of  moderate  Catholics  remained  without  effect  upon  the 
majority.  The  complaint  of  the  Lutherans  that  the  i^roposed  Recess 
would  tie  their  hands  and  oi)en  the  door  to  Catholic  reaction  naturally 
made  no  impression,  for  such  was  precisely  its  object.  The  Catholics 
saw  that  their  opportunity  had  come,  and  they  were  determined  to  take 
at  its  flood  the  tide  of  reaction.  The  plea  that  the  unanimous  decision 
of  1526  could  not  be  repealed  by  one  party,  though  plausible  enough  as 
logic  and  in  harmony  with  the  particularism  of  the  time,  rested  upon 
the  unconstitutional  assumption  that  the  parties  were  independent  of  the 
Empire's  authority  ;  and  it  was  not  reasonable  to  expect  any  Diet  to 
countenance  so  suicidal  a  theory. 

A  revolution  is  necessarily  weak  in  its  legal  aspect,  and  must  depend 
on  its  moral  strength  ;  and  to  revolution  the  Lutheran  Princes  in  spite  of 
themselves  were  now  brought.  They  were  driven  back  on  to  ground  on 
which  any  revolution  ma}^  be  based  ;  and  a  secret  understanding  to 
withstand  every  attack  made  on  them  on  account  of  God's  Word,  whether 
it  proceeded  from  the  Swabian  League  or  the  national  government,  was 
adopted  by  Electoral  Saxony,  Hesse,  Strassburg,  Ulm,  and  Niirnberg. 
We  fear  the  Emperor's  ban,  wrote  one  of  his  party,  but  we  fear  still 
more  God's  curse  ;  and  God,  they  proclaimed,  must  be  obe3'ed  before 
man.  This  was  an  appeal  to  God  and  to  conscience  which  transcended 
legal  considerations.  It  was  the  very  essence  of  the  Reformation, 
though  it  was  often  denied  by  Reformers  themselves  ;  and  it  explains 
the  fact  that  from  the  Protest,  in  which  the  Lutherans  embodied  this 
principle,  is  derived  the  name  which,  for  want  of  a  better  term,  is  loosely 
applied  to  all  the  Churches  which  renounced  the  obedience  of  Rome. 

A  formal  Protest  against  the  impending  Recess  of  the  Diet  had  been 
discussed  at  Niirnberg  in  March,  and  adopted  at  Speier  in  April.  When, 
on  the  19th,  Ferdinand  and  the  other  imperial  commissioners  refused  all 
concessions  and  confirmed  the  Acts  of  the  Diet,  the  Protest  was  publicly 
read.  The  Protestants  affirmed  that  the  Diet's  decree  was  not  binding 
on  them  because  they  were  not  consenting  parties  ;  they  proclaimed  their 
intention  to  abide  by  the  Recess  of  1526,  and  so  to  fulfil  their  religious 
duties  as  they  could  answer  for  it  to  God  and  the  Emperor.  They 
demanded  that  their  Protest  should  be  incorporated  in  the  Recess,  and 
on  Ferdinand's  refusal,  they  published  a  few  days  later  an  appeal  from 
the  Diet  to  the  Emperor,  to  the  next  General  Council  of  Christendom, 
or  to  a   congress  of  the   German  nation.      The  Princes  who  signed 


1529]  The  original  Protestants  205 

the  Protest  were  the  Elector  John  of  Saxony,  Margrave  George  of 
Brandenburg,  Dukes  Ernest  and  Francis  of  Brunswick-Liineburg, 
Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse,  and  Prince  Wolfgang  of  Anhalt;  and  the 
fourteen  cities  which  adhered  to  it  were  Strassburg,  Ulm,  Niirnberg, 
Constance,  Lindau,  Memmingen,  Kerapten,  Nordlingen,  Heilbronn, 
Reutlingen,  Isny,  St  Gallen,  Wissenberg,  and  Windsheim.  Of  such 
slender  dimensions  was  the  original  Protestant  Church  ;  small  as  it 
was,  it  was  only  held  together  by  the  negative  character  of  its  Protest ; 
dissensions  between  its  two  sections  increased  the  conflict  of  creeds 
and  parties  which  rent  the  whole  of  Germany  for  the  following  twenty- 
five  years. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  CONFLICT  OF  CREEDS   AND  PARTIES   IN 
GERMANY 

The  threats  of  the  victorious  Catholic  majority  at  Speier  and  the 
diplomacy  of  Philip  of  Hesse  had,  despite  the  forebodings  of  Luther 
and  the  imprecations  of  Melanchthon,  produced  a  temporary  alliance 
between  the  Lutheran  north  and  the  Zwinglian  south ;  and  the  summer 
and  autumn  of  1529  were  spent  in  attempts  to  make  the  union  perma- 
nent and  to  cement  it  by  means  of  religious  agreement.  In  the  secret 
understanding  concluded  between  Electoral  Saxony,  Hesse,  Nilrnberg, 
Ulm,  and  Strassburg  at  Speier  on  April  22,  it  was  arranged  that  a  con- 
ference should  be  held  at  Rodach,  near  Coburg,  in  the  following  June. 
But  this  coalition  between  Lutheran  Princes  and  Zwinglian  towns  had 
been  concealed  from  the  divines,  and  as  soon  as  it  came  to  their  ears 
they  raised  a  vehement  protest.  Melanchthon  lamented  that  his  friends 
had  not  made  even  greater  concessions  at  Speier;  if  they  had  only 
repudiated  Zwingli  and  all  his  works,  the  Catholics,  he  thought,  might 
not  have  hardened  their  hearts  against  Luther ;  and  he  did  his  best  to 
dissuade  his  friends  in  Niirnberg  from  participating  in  the  coming  con- 
gress at  Rodach.  Luther  not  only  denounced  the  idea  of  defending  by 
force  what  Melanchthon  described  as  "  the  godless  opinions  "  of  Zwingli, 
but  denied  the  right  of  Lutherans  to  defend  themselves.  Resort  to  arms 
he  considered  both  wicked  and  needless  ;  "  Be  ye  still,"  he  quoted  from 
Isaiah,  "  and  ye  shall  be  holpen  " ;  and,  while  the  conference  at  Rodach 
succumbed  to  his  opposition,  a  vast  army  of  Turks  was  swarming  up  the 
banks  of  the  Danube  and  directing  its  march  on  Vienna.  Solyman 
brandished  the  sword  which  Luther  refused  to  grasp. 

Hungary  had  failed  to  resist  the  Turks  by  herself  ;  but  the  Austrian 
shield,  under  which  she  took  shelter,  afforded  no  better  protection,  and 
Ferdinand  only  escaped  the  fate  of  Louis  II  because  he  kept  out  of  the 
way.  Absorbed  in  the  Lutheran  conflict,  he  made  no  attempt  to  secure 
his  conquests  of  1527,  and,  when  the  Turkish  invasion  began,  Zapolya 
descended  from  his  stronghold  in  the  Carpathians,  defeated  a  handful  of 
Ferdinand's  friends,  and  surrendered  the  crown  of  St  Stephen  on  the 

206 


1529 J        Siege  of  Vienna. —  Conference  of  Marhurg        207 

scene  of  Moli4cs  to  the  Sultan.  Unresisted,  the  Turkish  forces  swept 
over  the  plains  of  Hungary,  crossed  the  imperial  frontier,  and  on  Sep- 
tember 20  planted  their  standards  before  the  walls  of  Vienna.  But  over 
these  the  Crescent  was  never  destined  to  wave,  and  the  brilliant  defence 
of  Vienna  in  1529  stopped  the  first,  as  a  still  more  famous  defence  a 
hundred  and  fifty  years  later  foiled  the  last,  Turkish  onslaught  on 
Germany.  The  valour  of  the  citizens,  the  excellence  of  the  artillery, 
with  which  the  late  Emperor  Maximilian  had  furnished  the  city,  and 
the  early  rigour  of  winter  supplied  the  defects  of  the  Habsburg  power, 
and  on  October  15  Solyman  raised  the  siege.  Ferdinand  failed  to  make 
adequate  use  of  the  Sultan's  retreat ;  lack  of  pay  caused  a  mutiny  of 
landsknechte  ;  and  though  Gran  fell  into  his  hands  he  could  not  recap- 
ture Buda,  and  the  greater  part  of  Hungary  remained  under  the  nomi- 
nal rule  of  Zapolya,  but  real  control  of  the  Turk. 

The  relief  of  Vienna  was  received  with  mingled  feelings  in  Germany. 
Luther,  who  had  once  denied  the  duty  of  Christians  to  fight  the  infidel 
as  involving  resistance  to  God's  ordinance,  had  been  induced  to  recant 
by  the  imminence  of  danger  and  the  pressure  of  popular  feeling.  In 
1529  he  exhorted  his  countrymen  to  withstand  the  Turk,  in  language 
as  vigorous  as  that  in  which  he  had  urged  them  to  crush  the  peasants  ; 
and  the  retreat  of  the  Ottoman  was  generally  hailed  as  a  national  deliv- 
erance. But  the  joy  was  not  universal,  even  in  Germany.  Secular  and 
religious  foes  of  the  Habsburgs  had  offered  their  aid  to  Zapolya ;  while 
Philip  of  Hesse  lamented  the  Turkish  failure  and  hoped  for  another 
attack.  The  Turk  was  in  fact  the  ally  of  the  Reformation,  which  might 
have  been  crushed  without  his  assistance  ;  and  to  a  clear-sighted  states- 
man like  Pliilip  no  other  issue  than  ruin  seemed  possible  from  the 
mutual  enmity  of  the  two  Protestant  Churches. 

The  abortive  result  of  the  meeting  at  Rodach  in  June  and  the  aban- 
donment of  the  adjourned  congress  at  Schwabach  in  August  only  stirred 
the  Landgrave  to  fresh  efforts  in  the  cause  of  Protestant  union.  On 
the  last  day  in  September  he  assembled,  the  leading  divines  of  the  two 
communions  at  his  castle  of  Marburg  with  a  view  to  smoothing  over 
the  religious  dissensions  which  had  proved  fatal  to  their  political 
co-operation.  The  conference  was  not  likely  to  fail  for  want  of  eminent 
disputants.  The  two  heresiarchs  themselves,  Luther  and  Zwingli,  were 
present,  and  their  two  chief  supporters,  Melanchthon  and  Oecolampa- 
dius.  The  Zwinglian  cities  of  Germany  were  represented  by  Bucer  and 
Hedio  of  Strassburg  ;  the  Lutherans  by  Justus  Jonas  and  Caspar  Cruci- 
ger  from  Wittenberg,  Myconius  from  Gotha,  Brenz  from  Hall,  Osiander 
from  Niirnberg,  and  Stephen  Agricola  from  Augsburg.  But  they  came 
in  different  frames  of  mind ;  Luther  prophesied  failure  from  the  first, 
and  it  was  with  the  greatest  difficulty  that  Melanchthon  could  be 
induced  even  to  discuss  accommodation  with  such  impious  doctrines 
as  Zwingli's.     On  the  other  hand  the  Zurich  Reformer  started  with 


208  Luther  and  Zwingli  [l529 

sanguine  hopes  and  with  a  predisposition  to  make  every  possible  con- 
cession, in  order  to  pave  the  way  for  the  religious  and  political  objects 
which  he  and  the  Landgrave  cherished.  But  these  objects  were  viewed 
with  dislike  and  suspicion  by  the  Lutheran  delegates.  Public  con- 
troversy between  Luther  and  Zwingli  had  already  waxed  fierce.  Zwingli 
had  first  crossed  Luther's  mental  horizon  as  the  ally  of  Carlstadt,  a 
sinister  conjunction  the  effects  of  which  were  not  allayed  by  Zwingli's 
later  developments.  The  Swiss  Reformer  was  a  combination  of  the 
humanist,  the  theologian,  and  the  radical;  while  Luther  was  a  pure 
theologian.  Zwingli's  dogmas  were  softened  alike  by  his  classical 
sympathies  and  by  his  contact  with  practical  government.  Thus  he 
would  not  deny  the  hope  of  salvation  to  moral  teachers  like  Socrates  ; 
while  Luther  thought  that  the  extension  of  the  benefits  of  the  Gos- 
pel to  the  heathen,  who  had  never  been  taught  it,  deprived  it  of  all  its 
efficacy.  The  same  broad  humanity  led  Zwingli  to  limit  the  damning 
effects  of  original  sin;  he  shrank  from  consigning  the  vast  mass  of 
mankind  to  eternal  perdition,  believed  that  God's  grace  might  possibly 
work  through  more  channels  than  the  one  selected  by  Luther,  and  was 
inclined  to  circumscribe  that  diabolic  agency  which  played  so  large  a 
part  in  Luther's  theological  system  and  personal  experience. 

Zwingli  was  in  fact  the  most  modern  in  mind  of  all  the  Reformers, 
while  Luther  was  the  most  medieval.  Luther's  conception  of  truth 
was  theological,  and  not  scientific  ;  to  him  it  was  something  simple  and 
absolute,  not  complex  and  relative.  A  man  either  had  or  had  not  the 
Spirit  of  God ;  there  was  nothing  between  heaven  and  hell.  One  or 
the  other  of  us,  he  wrote  with  regard  to  Zwingli,  must  be  the  devil's 
minister ;  and  the  idea  that  both  parties  might  have  perceived  some  dif- 
ferent aspect  of  truth  was  beyond  his  comprehension.  This  dilemma  was 
his  favourite  dialectical  device ;  it  reduced  argument  to  anathema  and 
excluded  from  the  first  all  chance  of  agreement.  He  applied  it  to  political 
as  well  as  religious  discussions,  and  his  inability  to  grasp  the  conception 
of  compromise  determined  his  views  on  the  question  of  non-resistance. 
If  we  resist  the  Emperor,  he  said,  we  must  expel  him  and  become  Em- 
peror ourselves ;  then  the  Emperor  will  resist,  and  there  will  be  no  end 
until  one  party  is  crushed.  Tolerance  was  not  in  his  nature,  and  con- 
cession in  Church  or  in  State  was  to  him  evidence  of  indifference  or 
weakness.  Truth  and  falsehood,  right  and  wrong,  were  both  absolute. 
The  Papacy  embodied  abuses,  therefore  the  Pope  was  Antichrist ;  Cae- 
sar's authority  was  recognised  by  Christ,  therefore  all  resistance  was  sin. 

Between  Luther's  political  doctrines  and  those  of  Zwingli  there  was 
as  much  antipathy  as  between  their  theology.  Appropriately,  the  statue 
of  Luther  at  Worms  represents  him  armed  only  with  a  Bible,  while  that 
of  Zwingli  at  Zurich  bears  a  Bible  in  one  hand  and  a  sword  in  the  other. 
Zwingli  had  first  been  stirred  to  public  protest  by  a  secular  evil,  the 
corruption  of  his  country  by  foreign  gold;  and  political  aims  were 


1529]  Doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  209 

inextricably  interwoven  with  religious  objects  throughout  his  career. 
He  hoped  for  a  union  both  spiritual  and  temporal  between  Zurich  and 
Bern  and  the  cities  of  South  Germany,  by  means  of  which  Emperor  and 
Pope  should  alike  be  eliminated,  and  a  democratic  republic  established ; 
aristocracy,  he  declared,  had  always  been  the  ruin  of  States.  Under 
the  influence  of  this  idea  a  civic  affiliation  had  been  arranged  between 
Constance  and  Zurich  in  1527,  and  extended  to  St  Gallen,  Basel, 
Miilhausen  in  Elsass,  and  Biel  in  1529 ;  and  it  was  partly  to  further 
this  organisation  and  to  counteract  the  alliance  of  Austria  with  the  five 
Catholic  cantons  that  Zwingli  journeyed  to  Marburg. 

But  the  primary  objects  of  the  conference  were  theological,  and  it 
was  on  a  dispute  over  the  Eucharist  that  the  differences  between  the  two 
parties  came  to  a  head.  On  all  other  points  Zwingli  went  to  the  limit 
of  concession,  but  he  could  not  accept  the  doctrine  of  consubstantiation. 
Luther  chalked  on  the  table  round  which  they  sat,  the  text  "  This  is 
my  Body,"  and  nothing  could  move  him  from  its  literal  interpretation. 
Zwingli,  on  the  other  hand,  explained  the  phrase  by  referring  to  the 
sixth  chapter  of  St  John,  and  declared  that  "  is  "  meant  only  "  repre- 
sents "  ;  the  bread  and  the  wine  represented  the  body  and  blood,  as  a 
portrait  represents  a  real  person.  Christ  was  only  figuratively  "  the 
door "  and  the  "  true  vine  "  ;  and  the  Eucharist  instead  of  being  a 
miracle  was,  in  his  eyes,  only  a  feast  of  commemoration.  This  doctrine 
was  anathema  to  Luther;  at  the  end  of  the  debate  Zwingli  offered  him 
his  hand,  but  Luther  rejected  it,  saying  "Your  spirit  is  not  our  spirit." 
As  a  final  effort  at  compromise  Luther  was  induced  to  draw  up  the 
fifteen  Marburg  Articles,  of  which  the  Zwinglians  signed  all  but  the  one 
on  the  Eucharist  ;  and  it  was  agreed  that  each  party  should  moderate 
the  asperity  of  its  language  towards  the  other.  But  this  did  not 
prevent  the  Lutheran  divines  from  denying  that  Zwinglians  could  be 
members  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  or  Luther  himself  from  writing  a  few 
days  afterwards  that  they  were  "  not  only  liars,  but  the  very  incarnation 
of  lying,  deceit,  and  hypocrisy,  as  Carlstadt  and  Zwingli  show  by  their 
very  deeds  and  words."  The  hand  which  had  pulled  down  the  Roman 
Church  in  Germany  made  the  first  rent  in  the  Church  which  was 
beginning  to  grow  up  in  its  place.  Zwingli  went  back  to  Zurich  to 
meet  his  death  two  years  later  at  Kappel,  and  the  Lutherans  returned 
home  to  ponder  on  the  fate  which  the  approach  of  Charles  V  had 
in  store. 

Their  stubborn  determination  to  sacrifice  everj^thing  on  the  altar  of 
dogma  was  as  fatal  to  plans  for  their  internal  defence  as  it  had  been  to 
their  alliance  with  Zwingli.  A  few  weeks  after  the  Marburg  Conference 
a  meeting  was  held  at  Schwabach  to  consider  the  basis  of  common 
action  between  the  North  German  Princes  and  the  South  German  cities. 
As  a  preparation  for  this  attempt  at  concord  Luther  drew  up  another 
series  of  seventeen  articles  in  which  he  emphasised  the  points  at  issue 

C.    M.    H.    II.  14 


210       Charles  V  in  Germany.     Diet  of  Augsburg       [i530 

between  him  and  Zwingli,  and  persuaded  the  Lutheran  Princes  to  admit 
no  one  to  their  alliance  who  would  not  subscribe  to  every  single  dogma 
in  this  formulary.  As  a  natural  result  Strassburg  and  Ulm  refused  to 
sign  the  articles  at  Schwabach,  and  in  this  refusal  they  were  joined  by 
the  other  South  German  cities  at  a  further  conference  held  at  Schmal- 
kalden  in  December.  Luther  even  managed  to  shake  the  defensive 
understanding  between  Hesse  and  Saxony  by  persuading  the  Elector  of 
the  unlawfulness  of  any  resistance  to  the  Emperor.  The  Reformer  was 
fortified  in  this  attitude  by  a  child-like  faith  —  which  Ferdinand  was 
sagacious  enough  to  encourage — in  Charles'  pacific  designs,  although 
the  Emperor  had  denounced  the  Protest  from  Spain,  was  pledged  by 
his  treaty  with  the  Pope  to  the  extirpation  of  heresy,  and  arrested  the 
Protestant  envoys  who  appeared  before  him  in  Italy.  So  the  far-reach- 
ing designs  of  Philip  of  Hesse  and  Zwingli  for  the  defence  of  the  Refor- 
mation were  brought  to  naught  at  the  moment  when  the  horizon  was 
clouding  in  every  quarter. 

Li  May,  1530,  having  in  conjunction  with  Clement  VII  regulated 
the  affairs  of  Italy  and  discussed  schemes  for  regulating  those  of  the 
world,  Charles  V  crossed  the  Alps  on  his  second  visit  to  his  German 
dominions.  The  auspices  in  1530  were  very  different  from  those  of  1521. 
Then  he  had  left  Spain  in  open  rebellion,  he  was  threatened  with  war 
by  the  most  powerful  State  in  Europe,  and  the  attitude  of  the  Papacy 
was  still  doubtful.  Now  Spain  was  reduced  to  obedience  and  the 
Pope  to  impotence ;  France  had  suffered  the  greatest  defeat  of  the  cen- 
tury ;  Italy  lay  at  his  feet ;  and  Ferdinand  had  added  two  kingdoms 
to  the  family  estate.  Over  every  obstacle  Charles  seemed  to  have  tri- 
umphed. But  in  Germany  the  universal  agitation  against  Rome  had 
resolved  itself  into  two  organised  parties  which  threatened  to  plunge  the 
nation  into  civil  war.  Here  indeed  was  the  scene  of  the  last  of  Hercules' 
labours  ;  would  his  good  fortune  or  skill  yield  him  a  final  triumph  ? 

It  is  doubtful  whether  Charles  had  formed  any  clear  idea  of  the 
policy  he  must  adopt,  and  it  is  certain  that  his  ignorance  of  German 
methods  of  thought  and  character  and  his  incapacity  to  understand 
religious  enthusiasm  led  him  to  underrate  the  stubbornness  of  the 
forces  with  which  he  had  to  deal.  But  his  inveterate  habit  of  silence 
stood  him  in  good  stead  ;  Luther  regarded  with  awe  the  monarch  who 
said  less  in  a  year  than  he  himself  said  in  a  day.  Campeggi,  who 
accompanied  Charles  on  his  march,  daily  instilled  in  his  ear  the  counsels 
of  prompt  coercion  ;  and  the  death  of  the  politic  Gattinara  at  Innsbruck 
was  so  opportune  a  removal  of  a  restraining  influence  that  Lutherans 
ascribed  his  end  to  Italian  poison.  It  was,  however,  inconsistent  with  the 
Emperor's  nature  to  resort  to  force  before  ever}^  method  of  accommoda- 
tion had  been  tried  and  failed.  In  1521  he  refused  to  act  on  the  papal 
Bull  against  Luther  without  a  personal  attempt  at  mediation  ;  in  1530 
he  would  not  proceed  against  the  Protestants  by  force  of  arms  until  he 


1530]  Confession  of  Augsburg  211 

had  tried  the  effect  of  moral  suasion,  and  there  is  no  need  to  regard  the 
friendly  terms  in  which  he  summoned  the  Lutheran  Princes  to  the  Diet 
of  Augsburg  as  merely  a  cloak  to  conceal  his  hostile  designs. 

The  Diet  opened  on  June  20,  1530,  and  was  very  fully  attended. 
Luther,  who  was  still  under  the  ban  of  the  Empire,  could  come  no 
nearer  than  Coburg ;  his  place  as  preceptor  of  the  Protestant  Princes 
was  taken  by  Melanchthon  ;  and  the  celebrated  Confession  of  Augsburg, 
though  it  was  based  on  Luther's  Schwabach  Articles,  was  exclusively 
Melanchthon's  work.  The  attitude  of  the  Lutheran  divines  is  well 
expressed  by  the  tone  of  this  document  ;  they  were  clearly  on  the 
defensive,  and  the  truculent  Luther  himself,  who  had  dictated  terms  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Mainz,  was  now  reduced  to  craving  his  favour. 
Melanchthon  was  almost  prostrated  by  the  fear  of  religious  war  ;  and 
he  thought  it  could  best  be  averted  by  an  alliance  between  Catholics 
and  Lutherans  against  the  Zwinglians,  whom  he  regarded  as  no  better 
than  Anabaptists.  His  object  in  framing  the  Confession  was  therefore 
twofold,  to  minimise  the  differences  between  Lutherans  and  Catholics, 
and  to  exaggerate  those  between  Lutherans  and  Zwinglians  ;  he  hoped 
thus  to  heal  the  breach  with  the  former  and  complete  it  with  the 
latter. 

In  form  the  Confession  is  an  apologia,  and  not  a  creed  ;  it  does  not 
assert  expressly  the  truth  of  any  dogma,  but  merely  states  the  fact  that 
such  doctrines  are  taught  in  Lutheran  churches,  and  justifies  that 
teaching  on  the  ground  that  it  varies  little  if  at  all  from  that  of  the 
Church  of  Rome.  It  does  not  deny  the  divine  right  of  the  Papacy, 
the  character  indelebilis  of  the  priesthood,  or  the  existence  of  seven 
Sacraments  ;  it  does  not  assert  the  doctrine  of  predestination,  which 
had  brought  Luther  into  conflict  with  Erasmus  ;  and  the  doctrine 
of  the  Eucharist  is  so  ambiguously  expressed  that  the  only  fault  the 
Catholics  found  was  its  failure  to  assert  categorically  the  fact  of  transub- 
stantiation.  In  view  of  the  substantial  agreement  which  it  endeavoured 
to  establish  between  Catholic  and  Lutheran  dogma,  it  was  represented 
as  unjustifiable  to  exclude  the  Reformers  from  the  Catholic  Church  ; 
their  only  quarrel  with  their  opponents  was  about  traditions  and  abuses, 
and  their  object  was  not  polemic  or  propaganda,  but  merely  toleration 
for  themselves. 

This  Confession  was  to  have  been  read  at  a  public  session  of  the  Diet 
on  June  24  ;  but,  apparently  through  Ferdinand's  intervention,  the  plan 
was  changed  to  a  private  recitation  in  the  Emperor's  apartments,  and 
there  it  was  read  on  the  25th  by  the  Saxon  Chancellor,  Bayer.  Philip 
of  Hesse  was  loth  to  subscribe  so  mild  a  pronouncement,  but  eventually 
it  was  signed  by  all  the  original  Protestant  Princes,  with  the  addition  of 
the  Elector's  son,  John  Frederick,  and  by  two  cities,  Niirnberg  and 
Reutlingen.  But  the  door  was  completely  shut  on  the  Zwinglians;  in 
vain  Bucer  and  Capito  sought  an  arrangement  with  Melanchthon.     He 


212  Eff^^^i^  io  bring  about  unity  [i530 

would  not  even  consent  to  see  them  lest  he  should  be  compromised,  and 
Lutheran  pulpits  resounded  with  denunciations  of  the  Sacramentarians, 
as  Zwingli  and  his  supporters  now  began  to  be  called.  Zwingii  himself, 
so  soon  as  he  read  the  Confession,  addressed  to  Charles  a  statement  of  his 
own  belief,  in  which  he  threw  prudence  and  fear  to  the  winds.  He 
retracted  the  concessions  he  had  made  to  Lutheran  views  at  Marburg, 
and  asserted  his  diif erences  from  the  Catholic  Church  in  such  plain  terms 
that  ]\Ielanchthon  said  he  was  mad.  The  cities  of  Upper  Germany  were 
not  prepared  for  such  extremities  ;  but,  cut  off  from  the  Lutheran  com- 
munion, they  were  compelled  to  draw  up  a  confession  of  their  own,  which 
was  named  the  Tetrapolitana  from  the  four  cities,  Strassburg,  Constance, 
Lindau,  and  Memmingen,  which  signed  it.  It  was  mainly  the  work  of 
Bucer,  was  completed  on  July  11,  and,  while  Zwinglian  in  essence,  made 
a  serious  attempt  to  approach  the  doctrines  of  Wittenberg. 

It  appears  to  have  been  the  hope  of  the  Protestants,  and  probably  of 
Charles  also,  that  the  Emperor  would  be  able  to  make  himself  the 
mediator  between  the  Lutherans  and  Catholics,  and  to  effect  an  agreement 
by  inducing  each  side  to  make  concessions.  But  for  the  moment  the 
'Catholics  distrusted  Charles  more  than  the  Protestants  did.  They  had 
secular  as  well  as  ecclesiastical  grievances.  They  denounced  the  treaties 
concluded  in  Italy  as  wanting  their  concurrence  ;  they  were  horrified  at 
the  example  set  by  Charles  in  secularising  the  see  of  Utrecht,  and  they 
refused  to  confirm  the  Pope's  grant  of  ecclesiastical  revenues  to  P^erdinand; 
while  the  orthodox  Wittelsbachs  were  moving  heaven  and  earth  to 
prevent  the  election  of  Charles'  brother  as  King  of  the  Romans.  They 
were  thus  by  no  means  disposed  to  place  themselves  in  the  Emperor's 
hands  ;  they  insisted  ratlier  that  they  should  determine  the  Empire's 
policy,  and  that  Charles  should  merely  execute  their  decrees  ;  and, 
lacking  the  Emperor's  broader  outlook,  they  were  less  inclined  to  make 
concessions  to  peace.  It  was  the  growing  conviction  that  Charles  was 
a  helpless  tool  in  the  hands  of  their  enemies  which  caused  a  revulsion  of 
the  Protestant  feeling  in  his  favour. 

Yet  the  Catholics  were  not  all  in  favour  of  extreme  courses,  and 
either  Melanchthon's  moderation  or  the  effect  of  twelve  years'  criticism 
produced  some  modification  of  Catholic  dogma,  as  expressed  in  the  Con- 
futation of  the  Confession  drawn  up  by  Eck,  Faber,  Cochlaeus,  and  others, 
and  presented  on  August  3.  The  doctrine  of  good  works  was  so  defined 
as  to  guard  against  the  previous  popuhir  abuses  of  it  ;  and  in  other 
respects  there  were  signs  of  the  process  of  purifying  Catholic  dogma  which 
had  commenced  at  the  Congress  of  Ratisbon  in  152-t  and  was  completed 
at  the  Council  of  Trent.  But  these  concessions  were  too  slight  to  satisfy 
even  Melanchthon  ;  and  the  Protestant  Princes  were  not  frightened  into 
submission  by  the  threats  of  Charles  that  unless  they  returned  to  the 
Catholic  fold  he  would  proceed  against  them  as  became  the  protector 
and  steward  of  the  Church. 


1530]  Failure  of  conciliation  at  Augsburg  213 

Neither  side  was,  however,  prepared  for  religious  war ;  and,  when 
the  Confutation  and  Charles'  menaces  failed  to  precipitate  unity,  a  series 
of  confused  and  lengthy  negotiations  between  the  various  parties,  the 
Emperor,  the  Pope,  the  Catholic  majority,  and  the  Lutherans,  was  initi- 
ated. In  the  course  of  these  Melanchthon  receded  still  further  from 
the  Protestant  standpoint.  He  offered  on  behalf  of  the  Lutherans  to 
recognise  episcopal  authority,  auricular  confession  and  fasts,  and  under- 
took to  regard  the  Communion  in  both  kinds  and  the  marriage  of  priests, 
which  he  had  before  demanded,  as  merely  temporary  concessions  pending 
the  convocation  of  a  General  Council.  He  even  went  so  far  as  to  assert 
that  the  Lutherans  admitted  papal  authority,  adhered  to  papal  doctrine, 
and  that  this  was  the  reason  for  their  unpopularity  in  Germany.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Catholic  members  of  the  commission  appointed  to 
discuss  the  question  were  ready  to  concede  a  communion  suh  utrdque, 
on  condition  that  the  Lutherans  would  acknowledge  communion  in  one 
kind  to  be  equally  valid,  and  declare  the  adoption  of  either  form  to  be 
a  matter  of  indifference. 

Melanchthon  was  prepared  to  make  these  admissions,  but  his  party 
refused  to  follow  him  any  further.  Luther  grew  restive  at  Coburg, 
and  began  to  talk  of  the  impossibility  of  reconciling  Christ  with 
Belial,  and  Luther  with  the  Pope  ;  to  restore  episcopal  jurisdiction  was, 
he  thought,  equivalent  to  putting  their  necks  in  the  hangman's  rope, 
and  on  September  20  he  expressed  a  preference  for  risking  war  to  making 
further  concessions.  If  the  Catholics  would  not  receive  the  Confession 
or  the  Gospel,  he  wrote  to  Melanchthon  with  a  characteristic  allusion  to 
Judas,  "  let  them  go  to  their  own  place."  The  Princes  had  never  been  so 
timorous  as  the  divines.  They  were  not  so  much  concerned  for  the  unity  of 
the  Empire  as  Melanchthon  was  for  that  of  the  Church.  Philip  of  Hesse 
told  the  Emperor  he  would  sacrifice  life  and  limb  for  his  faith,  and  long 
before  the  Diet  had  reached  its  conclusion  he  rode  off  without  asking 
the  Emperor's  leave.  The  Elector's  fortitude  was  such  that  Luther 
declared  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  had  made  him  into  a  hero,  and  lesser 
Princes  were  not  less  constant.  Their  steadfastness  and  the  uncom- 
promising attitude  of  the  Catholics  stiffened  the  backs  of  the  Lutheran 
divines ;  and,  in  reply  to  a  taunt  that  the  Confutation  had  demolished 
the  Confession,  they  presented  an  Apology  for  the  latter,  the  tone  of 
which  was  much  less  humble.  No  agreement  being  now  expected,  the 
Catholic  majority  of  the  Estates  drew  up  a  proposal  for  the  Recess  on 
September  22.  The  Protestants  were  given  till  April  15  to  decide 
whether  they  would  conform  or  not,  and  meanwhile  they  were  ordered 
to  make  no  innovations  on  their  own  account,  to  put  no  constraint  on 
Catholics  in  their  territories,  and  to  assist  the  Emperor  to  eradicate 
Zwinglians  and  Anabaptists.  Against  this  proposal  the  Protestant 
Princes  again  protested  ;  fourteen  cities,  including  Augsburg  itself, 
followed  their  example  ;   and  they  then  departed,  leaving  the  Catholic 


214     Recess  of  Augsburg.     Resort  to  legal  process    [i530-l 

majority  to  pursue  its  own  devices,  and  to  discover  within  itself  oppor- 
tunities for  division. 

The  failure  of  Melanchthon's  plan  of  attaining  peace  with  Catholics 
by  breach  with  the  Zwinglians  produced  a  certain  reaction  of  feeling 
and  policy.  Luther  was,  partially  at  any  rate,  disabused  of  his  faith 
in  Charles'  intentions,  and  the  pressure  of  common  danger  facilitated 
a  renewed  attempt  at  union.  With  this  object  in  view,  Bucer,  the  chief 
author  of  the  Tetrapolitana,  called  on  Luther  at  Coburg  on  September  25, 
and  was  received  with  surprising  favour.  Luther  even  expressed  a  will- 
ino-ness  to  lay  down  his  life  three  times  if  only  the  dissensions  among 
the  Reformers  might  be  healed,  and  Bucer  himself  had  a  genius  for 
accommodation.  Under  these  favourable  circumstances  he  contrived  to 
evolve  a  plausible  harmonisation  of  the  Wittenberg  and  Tetrapolitan 
doctrines  of  the  Eucharist  which  was  sufficient  for  the  day  and  led  to 
an  invitation  of  the  South  German  cities  to  tlie  meeting  of  Protestant 
Powers  to  be  held  in  December  at  Schmalkalden. 

Meanwhile  the  Catholic  majority  of  the  Diet  continued  its  delibera- 
tions at  Augsburg.  The  aid  against  the  Turks  which  Charles  desired 
had  not  yet  been  voted,  and  before  he  obtained  it  the  Emperor  had  to 
drop  his  demand  for  Ferdinand's  ecclesiastical  endowment,  and  promise 
to  press  upon  the  Pope  the  redress  of  the  hundred  gravamina  which 
were  once  more  revived.  Substantial  concessions  to  individual  Electors 
secured  the  prospect  of  Ferdinand's  election  as  King  of  the  Romans, 
which  took  place  at  Cologne  on  January  5,  1531;  and  the  Diet  con- 
cluded with  the  adoption  of  the  Recess  on  November  19.  The  Edict 
of  Worms  was  to  be  put  into  execution,  episcopal  jurisdictions  were  to 
be  maintained,  and  Church  property  to  be  restored.  Of  more  practical 
importance  than  these  resolutions  was  the  reconstitution  of  the  Reichs- 
kammergericht,  which  henceforward  began  to  play  an  important  part  in 
imperial  politics.  It  was  now  organised  so  as  to  be  an  efficient  instru- 
ment in  carrying  out  the  will  of  the  majority,  and  was  solemnly  pledged  to 
the  suppression  of  Lutheranism.  The  campaign  was  to  open,  not  on  a  field 
of  battle,  but  in  the  Courts  of  law ;  and  the  attack  was  to  be  directed, 
not  against  the  persons  of  Lutheran  Princes,  but  against  their  seculari- 
sation of  Church  property.  Countless  suits  were  already  pending  before 
the  Kammergericht ;  and,  however  inconsistent  such  a  policy  may  have 
been  in  the  Habsburgs  who  had  themselves  profited  largely  by  seculari- 
sation, the  law  of  the  Empire  gave  the  Kammergericht  no  option  but  to 
decide  against  the  Lutherans,  and  its  decisions  would  have  completely 
undermined  the  foundations  of  the  rising  Lutheran  Church. 

This  resort  to  law  instead  of  to  arms  is  characteristic  of  Charles' 
caution.  Backed  as  he  was  by  an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  Diet, 
it  might  seem  that  the  Emperor  would  make  short  work  of  the  dissident 
Princes  and  towns.  But  in  German  imperial  politics  there  was  usually 
many  a  slip  between  judgment  and  execution  ;  and  of  the  Princes  who 


1530-1]  League  of  Schmalkalden  215 

voted  for  the  Recess  of  Augsburg  there  were  only  two,  the  Elector 
Joachim  of  Brandenburg  and  Duke  George  of  Saxony,  who  were  ready 
to  face  a  civil  war  for  the  sake  of  their  convictions.  In  Germany  were 
reproduced  on  a  smaller  scale  all  those  elements  of  disunion  which  had 
made  the  attempted  crusades  of  the  previous  century  ridiculous  fiascos. 
Each  Catholic  Prince  desired  the  suppression  of  heresy,  but  no  one  would 
set  his  face  against  the  enemy  for  fear  of  being  stabbed  in  the  back  by 
a  friend.  The  rulers  of  Bavaria  and  Austria  were  both  unimpeachably 
orthodox,  but  Bavaria  was  again  intriguing  with  Hesse  against  the 
House  of  Habsburg.  The  Emperor  himself  had  few  troops  and  no 
money.  The  multiplicity  of  interests  pressing  upon  his  attention  pre- 
vented his  concentration  upon  any  one  object,  and  increased  his  natural 
indecision  of  character.  Never  was  his  policy  more  hesitating  and  cir- 
cumspect than  in  1530-1,  when  fortune  seemed  to  have  placed  the  ball 
at  his  feet. 

His  inactivity  enabled  the  Protestants  to  mature  their  plans  and 
organise  an  effective  bond  of  resistance.  The  doctrine  of  implicit 
obedience  to  the  Emperor  broke  down  as  danger  approached;  the 
divines  naively  admitted  that  they  had  not  before  realised  that  the 
sovereign  power  was  subject  to  law  ;  and  Luther,  acknowledging  that  he 
was  a  child  in  temporal  matters,  allowed  himself  to  be  persuaded  that 
Charles  was  not  the  Caesar  of  the  New  Testament,  but  a  governor  whose 
powers  were  limited  by  the  Electors  in  the  same  way  as  the  Roman 
Consul's  by  the  Senate,  the  Doge's  by  the  Venetian  Council,  and  a  Bishop's 
by  his  Chapter.  The  Protestants,  having  already  denied  that  a  minority 
could  be  bound  by  a  majority  of  the  Diet,  now  carried  the  separatist 
principle  a  step  further  by  declaring  that  the  Empire  was  a  federated 
aristocracy  of  independent  sovereigns,  who  were  themselves  to  judge 
when  and  to  what  extent  they  would  yield  obedience  to  their  elected 
president.  It  is  not,  however,  fair  to  charge  them  with  adopting 
Protestantism  in  order  to  further  their  claims  to  political  indepen- 
dence ;  it  is  more  correct  to  say  that  they  extended  their  particularist 
ideas  in  order  to  protect  their  religious  principles. 

The  first  care  of  the  Princes  and  burghers  who  deliberated  at 
Schmalkalden  from  December  22  to  31, 1530,  was  to  arrange  for  common 
action  with  regard  to  the  litigation  before  the  Reichskammergerieht. 
But  the  decision  which  gave  their  meeting  its  real  importance  was  their 
agreement  to  form  a  league  for  mutual  defence  against  all  attacks  on 
account  of  their  faith,  from  whatever  quarter  these  might  proceed. 
This,  the  first  sketch  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League,  was  subscribed  by  the 
Elector  of  Saxony,  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse,  the  Brunswick-Liineburg 
Dukes,  Prince  Wolfgang  of  Anhalt,  the  two  Counts  of  Mansfeld,  and  the 
cities  of  Magdeburg  and  Bremen.  Margrave  George  of  Brandenburg  and 
the  city  of  Nlirnberg  were  not  yet  prepared  to  take  the  decisive  step  ;  and, 
although  the  Tetrapolitan  cities,  reinforced  by  Ulm,  Biberach,  Isny, 


216  Battle  ofKappel.  Swiss  war  proposed  hy  Ferdinand  [i53l 

and  Reutlingen,  expressed  their  concurrence  in  the  League  at  a  second 
meeting  in  February,  1531,  and  three  Dukes  of  Brunswick,  Philip,  Otto, 
and  Francis,  and  the  city  of  Liibeck  also  acceded  to  it,  its  full  and  final 
development  depended  upon  the  residt  of  the  contest  then  raging 
between  Lutherans  and  Zwinglians  for  control  of  the  South  German 
cities. 

Bucer,  after  his  partial  success  with  Luther  at  Coburg,  proceeded  to 
Zurich  in  the  hoj)e  of  bringing  Zwingli  to  the  point  of  concession  where 
Luther  had  come  to  meet  him.  But  as  the  German  Reformer  grew 
more  conciliatory,  the  Swiss  became  more  uncompromising.  In  Feb- 
ruar}-,  1531,  the  Swiss  cities  refused  to  join  the  Schmalkaldic  League, 
and  in  the  same  month  a  Congress  of  Zwinglian  divines  at  Memmingen 
attacked  the  Catholic  ceremonial  observed  in  Lutheran  churches.  This 
aggressive  attitude  may  be  traced  to  the  rapid  progress  which  Zwinglian 
doctrines  were  making  in  South  Germany  at  the  expense  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  At  Augsburg  itself  the  Tetrapolitan  or  Bucerian  creed 
defeated  its  Lutheran  rival ;  and  in  other  German  cities  more  violent 
manifestations  of  the  Zwinglian  spirit  prevailed.  Under  the  influence  of 
Bucer,  Blarer,  and  Oecolampadius,  Ulm,  Reutlingen,  Biberach,  and 
other  hitherto  Lutheran  cities  destroyed  pictures,  images,  and  organs  in 
their  churches,  and  selected  pastors  who  looked  for  inspiration  to  Zurich 
and  not  to  Wittenberg ;  those  cities  which  had  already  joined  the 
Schmalkaldic  League  refused  at  its  meeting  at  Frankfort  in  June  to 
subscribe  to  the  League's  project  for  military  defence.  South  Germany 
seemed  in  fact  to  be  about  to  fall  like  ripe  fruit  into  Zwingli's  lap, 
when  his  power  suddenly  waned  at  home,  and  the  defeat  of  Kappel 
(October  11,  1531)  cut  short  his  life,  and  ruined  his  cause  in  Germany ; 
it  was  left  for  Calvin  to  gather  up  the  fragments  of  Zwingli's  German 
party;  and  to  establish  an  ultra-Protestant  opposition  to  the  Lutheran 
Church. 

This  unexpected  disaster  to  the  Reformation  in  Switzerland  appeared 
to  Ferdinand  to  offer  a  magnificent  opportunity  for  crushing  the 
movement  in  Germany.  He  was  thoroughly  convinced  that  Swiss 
political  and  religious  radicalism  was  the  most  formidable  of  the  enemies 
of  German  Catholicism  and  the  Habsburg  monarchy,  and  that  deprived  of 
this  stimulant  the  milder  Lutheran  disease  would  soon  yield  to  vigorous 
treatment.  He  proposed  to  his  brother  an  armed  support  of  the  Five 
Catholic  cantons,  and  the  forcible  restoration  of  Catholicism  in  Zurich 
and  Bern.  But  the  Emperor  declined  to  involve  himself  in  a  Swiss 
campaign.  His  intervention  in  Switzerland  would,  he  feared,  precipitate 
war  with  Francis  I,  who  was  already  beginning  again  to  cast  longing 
eyes  on  Milan,  and  feeling  his  way  to  an  understanding  with  Clement  VIL 
The  Pope's  fear  of  a  General  Council,  which  Catholics  no  less  than 
Protestants  were  demanding  from  Charles  V,  was  a  powerful  weapon  in 
the  liands  of  Francis  I.     Clement  was  haunted  by  the  suspicion  that  a 


1531]         Development  of  the  Sclimalkaldic  League  217 

Council  might  be  as  fatal  to  him  as  that  of  Basel  had  threatened  to  be 
to  his  predecessors  ;  and  the  Emperor's  enemies  suggested  that  if  it  met 
Charles  would  propose  the  restoration  of  the  Papal  States  to  the  Empire 
from  which  they  had  been  wrung.  Rather  than  risk  such  a  fate,  some  at 
least  of  his  friends  urged  Clement  to  accede  to  the  Lutheran  demand  for 
communion  in  both  kinds  and  clerical  marriage,  and  maintained  that  the 
Augsburg  Confession  was  not  repugnant  to  the  Catholic  faith.  Without 
the  help  of  the  heretics  it  seemed  impossible  for  Charles  to  resist  the 
approaching  Turkish  onslaught  ;  and  the  Emperor's  confessor,  Loaysa, 
urged  him  not  to  trouble  if  their  souls  went  to  hell,  so  long  as  they 
served  him  on  earth.  And  so  the  term  of  grace  accorded  to  the 
Lutherans  by  the  Recess  of  Augsburg  expired  in  April,  1531,  without 
a  thought  of  resort  to  compulsion  ;  and  instead  of  this,  the  Emperor 
suspended,  on  July  8,  the  action  of  the  Reichshammergericht.  He  had 
missed  the  golden  opportunity  ;  it  did  not  recur  for  fifteen  years,  during 
which  two  wars  with  the  Turk  in  Europe,  two  wars  in  Africa,  and  two 
wars  with  France  distracted  his  attention  from  German  affairs. 

This  inaction  on  Charles'  x)art  cooled  the  martial  ardour  of  the 
Schmalkaldic  League  ;  and  Zwinglian  aggression  in  South  Germany 
increased  their  disinclination  to  help  the  Swiss  in  their  domestic  troubles. 
Li  reality  the  battle  of  Kappel  was  of  greater  advantage  to  Luther  than 
to  the  Emperor.  For  a  second  time  the  Reformation  was  freed  from 
the  embarrassment  of  a  mutinous  left  wing  ;  and  Luther,  although  he 
professed  to  lament  Zwingli's  fate,  regarded  the  battle  as  the  judgment 
of  God,  and  Zwingli  as  damned  unless  the  Almighty  made  an  irregular 
exception  in  his  favour.  The  cities  of  Upper  Germany,  deprived  of 
their  mainstay  at  Zurich,  gravitated  in  the  direction  of  Wittenberg  ; 
while  the  defeat  of  one  section  of  the  Reformers  convinced  the  rest  of 
the  need  for  common  defence.  Under  the  pressure  of  these  circum- 
stances the  Schmalkaldic  League  completed  its  organisation,  and  of 
necessity  assumed  a  predominantly  Lutheran  and  territorial  character. 
At  two  conferences  held  at  Nordhausen  and  Frankfort  (November- 
December,  1531)  the  military  details  of  the  League  were  settled,  and 
the  res];)ective  contributions  of  its  various  members  fixed  ;  the  Princes 
obtained  a  large  majority  of  votes  in  its  council  of  war  and  exclusive 
command  of  its  armies.  Saxony  and  Hesse  were  treated  as  equal  ;  if 
the  seat  of  war  was  in  Saxony  or  Westphalia  the  supreme  command 
was  to  fall  to  the  Elector,  if  in  Hesse  or  Upper  Germany  to  the 
Landgrave. 

The  accession  of  Gottingen,  Goslar,  and  Eimbeck  to  the  League, 
and  the  success  of  the  Reformation  at  Hamburg,  at  Rostock,  and  in 
Denmark,  where  Christian's  return  to  Catholicism  brought  no  nearer 
his  restoration  to  the  throne,  left  the  Schmalkaldic  League  in  almost 
undisputed  possession  of  Nortli  Germany  ;  and  it  became  a  veritable 
imperium  in  imperio  with  a  foreign  policy  of  its  own.     It  might  now  be 


218  Turkish  invasion  repelled  [l532 

reckoned  one  of  the  anti-Habsbiirg  powers  in  Europe  ;  its  agents  sought 
alliance  with  France,  England,  Denmark,  and  Venice  ;  and  it  began  to 
regard  itself  as  a  League  not  merely  for  self-defence  within  the  Empire, 
but  for  the  furtherance  of  the  Protestant  cause  all  over  Europe.  Nor 
were  its  aims  exclusively  religious  ;  theology  merged  into  politics,  and 
Protestantism  sometimes  laboured  under  the  suspicion  of  being  merely 
anti-imperialism.  France  and  Venice  had  few  points  in  common  with 
Luther  ;  and  Philip  of  Hesse's  plan  to  utilise  a  Turkish  invasion  for  the 
restoration  of  Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg  outraged  patriotic  sentiment. 
On  the  Catholic  side  Bavarian  objects  were  no  less  selfish ;  and  the 
Wittelsbachs  endeavoured  to  undermine  Ferdinand's  supports  against 
the  Turk  in  Germany,  Bohemia,  and  Hungary.  In  both  professedly 
religious  camps  there  was  political  double-dealing  ;  Hesse  was  ready  to 
side  Avith  either  Austria  or  Bavaria ;  while  the  Wittelsbachs  fomented 
Charles'  hostility  to  the  Lutherans  and  denounced  his  concessions  as 
treason  to  the  faith,  at  the  same  time  that  they  were  hand  in  glove  with 
Hesse  for  an  attack  on  the  Habsburg  power. 

These  extreme  and  unpatriotic  schemes  were  defeated  by  a  tacit  un- 
derstanding between  Catholic  and  Protestant  moderates  ;  and  Germany 
presented  a  fairly  united  front  to  its  infidel  foe.  Saxony  and  cities  like 
Ulm  and  Nilrnberg  convinced  Charles  that  the  coming  of  the  Turk 
would  be  used  for  no  sectional  purposes  ;  and  the  Emperor  in  return 
promised  the  Lutherans  at  least  a  temporary  peace.  He  turned  a  deaf 
ear  to  the  demands  at  the  Diet  of  Ratisbon  (April,  1532)  for  the 
execution  of  the  Augsburg  Recess,  while  Luther  denounced  the  claims  of 
his  forward  friends  to  toleration  for  all  future  Protestants  even  in 
Catholic  territories  as  impossible  and  unreasonable.  At  Niirnberg 
(July  23,1532)  an  agreement  was  reached  by  which  all  suits  against  the 
Protestants  before  the  Reichskammergericht  were  quashed  and  they  were 
guaranteed  peace  until  the  next  Diet  or  a  General  Council.  The  under- 
standing was  to  be  kept  secret  for  fear  of  offending  the  Catholics,  but  it 
sufficed  to  open  to  Charles  the  armouries  of  the  Protestant  cities,  and 
Niirnberg  sent  double  its  quota  to  serve  in  the  Turkish  campaign. 

Ferdinand  had  in  vain  sought  to  stave  off  the  attack  by  which 
Solyman  hoped  to  revenge  his  defeat  at  Vienna.  He  offered  first  to 
pay  tribute  for  Hungary,  and  then  to  cede  it  to  Zapolya  on  condition 
that  it  return  to  the  Habsburgs  on  Zapolya's  death.  These  terms  were 
rejected  with  scorn,  and  on  April  26  the  Sultan  commenced  his  march. 
His  army  was  reckoned  at  a  quarter  of  a  million  men,  the  stereotyped 
estimate  of  Turkish  invading  forces,  but  half  of  these  were  non-combat- 
ants ;  the  Emperor's  troops  did  not  exceed  eighty  thousand,  but  they 
were  well  equipped  and  eager  for  the  fray.  The  same  enthusiasm  was 
not  conspicuous  in  the  Turkish  ranks  ;  they  were  foiled  by  the  heroic 
resistance  of  Guns  (August  7-28)  and  made  no  serious  attempt  either  to 
take  Vienna  or  to  come  to  close  quarters  with  the  imperial  forces  ;  in 


1530-3]  Failure  of  Charles'  intervention  219 

September  they  commenced  their  retreat  through  Carinthia  and  Croatia, 
which  they  ravaged  on  their  way. 

The  precipitate  withdrawal  of  the  Turks  was  followed  by  an  equally 
sudden  abandonment  of  the  campaign  by  Charles  V.  After  all  his  brave 
words  it  Avas  a  shock  tojiis  friends  and  admirers  when  he  made  no  effort 
to  seize  the  fruits  of  victory  and  recover  Hungary  for  his  brother  ;  for  a 
vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war  in  1532  might  have  restored  to  Christen- 
dom lands  which  remained  under  Turkish  rule  for  nearly  two  centuries 
longer.  There  are  explanations  enough  for  his  course  ;  the  German  levies 
refused  to  pass  the  imperial  frontiers,  regarding  self-defence  as  the  limit 
of  their  duty  ;  the  Spaniards  and  Italians  confined  their  efforts  mainly 
to  pillaging  German  villages  ;  and  Cranmer,  who  accompanied  Charles' 
Court,  describes  how  they  spread  greater  desolation  than  the  Turks 
themselves  and  how  the  peasants  in  revenge  fell  upon  and  slew  the 
Emperor's  troops  whenever  opportunity  offered  ;  so  that  delay  in  dis- 
banding his  army  might  have  fanned  the  enmity  between  Charles' 
German  and  Spanish  subjects  into  war.  But  other  reasons  accounted 
for  the  Emperor's  departure  from  Germany,  which  was  once  more  sacri- 
ficed to  the  exigencies  of  Charles'  cosmopolitan  interests.  The  Pope, 
irritated  alike  by  the  Emperor's  bestowal  of  Modena  and  Reggio  on  the 
Duke  of  Ferrara,  and  by  his  persistence  in  demanding  a  General 
Council,  was  proposing  to  marry  his  niece  Catharine  de'  Medici  to 
Henry,  Duke  of  Orleans ;  and  a  union  between  Clement  and  Francis  I 
would  again  have  threatened  Charles'  position  in  Italy.  He  regarded 
two  objects  as  then  of  transcendent  importance,  the  reconciliation  of 
the  Pope  and  the  convocation  of  a  General  Council.  They  were  quite 
incompatible,  yet  to  them  Charles  sacrificed  the  chance  of  regaining 
Hungary. 

The  result  can  only  be  described  as  a  comprehensive  failure.  The 
Emperor's  interviews  with  Clement  in  February,  1533,  did  not  prevent  the 
Pope's  alliance  with  France,  nor  his  sanction  of  Cranmer's  appointment 
to  the  see  of  Canterbury,  which  enabled  Henry  VIII  to  complete  his 
divorce  from  Catharine  of  Aragon.  Charles'  two  years'  stay  in  Germany 
had  effected  little ;  Ferdinand,  indeed,  was  King  of  the  Romans  but 
his  influence  was  less  than  before,  while  the  power  of  the  Protestants 
had  been  greatly  increased.  The  Emperor  had  crossed  the  Alps  in  the 
spring  of  1530  with  a  record  of  almost  unbroken  success  ;  he  recrossed 
them  in  the  autumn  of  1532  having  added  a  list  of  failures  ;  the  German 
labour  had  proved  herculean,  but  Charles  had  proved  no  Hercules.  For 
another  decade  Germany  was  left  to  fight  out  its  own  political  and 
religious  quarrels  with  little  help  or  hindrance  from  its  sovereign.  His 
intervention  in  1530-2  had  brought  peace  to  no  one  ;  the  Protestants 
had  little  security  against  the  attacks  of  the  ReichshammergerieU  ;  the 
Catholics  were  unable  to  prevent  the  progress  of  heresy;  and  while 
Charles  was  journeying  farther  and  farther  away  from  Germany  the 


220       Scheme  to  restore  Ulrich  in  Wilrttemhei^g        [i532-4 

Habsburg  authority  in  the  Empire  was  threatened  with  one  of  the  most 
serious  checks  it  experienced. 

The  restoration  of  Duke  Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg  was  not  merely  a 
favourite  design  of  the  Protestants  for  the  extension  of  the  Reformation 
in  South  Germany ;  it  was  regarded  by  German  Catholic  Princes  and  by 
the  Emperor's  foreign  foes  as  an  invaluable  means  of  undermining  the 
Habsburg  power.  It  is  even  believed  that  Clement  VII  himself  in 
his  anger  at  Charles'  persistent  demand  for  a  General  Council,  discussed 
the  execution  of  this  jDlan  at  his  interview  with  Francis  I  at  Marseilles  in 
the  autumn  of  1533.  At  any  rate  the  French  King  went  from  Marseilles 
to  Bar-le-duc,  where  in  January,  1534,  he  agreed  with  Philip  of  Hesse  to 
give  the  enterprise  extensive  financial  support,  cloaked  under  a  fictitious 
sale  of  Montbeliard  (the  property  of  Ulrich)  to  the  French  King.  The 
moment  was  opportune.  Ferdinand  was  busy  in  Bohemia  and  Hungary  ; 
the  outbreak  of  the  Anabaptist  revolution  gave  Philip  of  Hesse  an 
excuse  for  arming  ;  and  the  decrepitude  of  the  Swabian  League  neutral- 
ised the  force  by  which  Wiirttemberg  liad  been  won  and  maintained 
for  the  Austrian  House.  Religious  divisions  had  impaired  the  harmony 
of  the  League,  and  political  jealousies  had  transformed  it  from  a 
willing  tool  of  the  Habsburgs  into  an  almost  hostile  power.  In 
November,  1532,  the  Electors  of  Trier  and  the  Palatinate  and  Philip  of 
Hesse  had  agreed  to  refuse  a  renewal  of  the  League  ;  and  in  May,  1533, 
some  of  its  most  important  city  members,  Ulm,  Niirnberg,  and  Augsburg, 
formed  a  separate  alliance  for  the  defence  of  freedom  of  conscience.  The 
strictly  defensive  Catholic  confederation  established  at  Halle  in  ducal 
Saxony  in  the  following  November  between  the  Elector  Joachim  of 
Brandenburg,  Dukes  George  of  Saxony,  Eric  and  Henry  of  Brunswick, 
was  neither  a  match  for  the  Schmalkaldic  League,  nor  had  it  any 
interest  in  the  perpetuation  of  Austrian  rule  in  Wiirttemberg.  Joachim 
told  Philip  that  Ferdinand  would  get  no  help  from  the  Electors  ;  and  his 
words  proved  true  indeed.  The  Archbishops  of  Mainz  and  Trier  observed 
a  strict  neutrality  ;  the  Elector  Palatine's  promise  of  aid  was  delusive  ; 
while  the  Catholic  bishop  of  Miinster  and  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick, 
possibly  on  the  understanding  that  Philip  would  assist  them  to  put  down 
the  Miinster  Anabaptists,  consented  to  help  him  in  Wiirttemberg, 
and  assurances  of  support  were  also  forthcoming  from  Henry  VIII, 
Christian  III  of  Denmark,  and  Zapolya. 

In  1532  Ulrich's  son  Christopher,  alarmed  at  the  prospect  of  being 
carried  oif  to  Spain,  escaped  from  the  Emperor's  Court  during  the 
Turkish  campaign,  and  in  the  following  year  appeared  at  a  meeting  of 
the  Swabian  League  at  Augsburg.  His  cause  was  warmly  advocated 
by  a  French  envoy  and  almost  unanimously  approved  by  the  League. 
Bavaria,  indeed,  wished  to  restore  Christopher,  who  had  been  educated 
as  a  Catholic,  instead  of  his  father,  a  strenuous  Protestant,  and  on  this 
score  quarrelled  with  Philip  of  Hesse.     But  French  aid  enabled  Philip 


1534]  Peace  of  Cadan  221 

to  diipense  with  Bavarian  assistance.  In  April,  1534,  he  mustered  a 
well-equipped  army  of  20,000  foot  and  4000  horse,  and  on  the  12th  a 
manifesto  was  issued  to  the  people  of  Wiirttemberg,  who,  disgusted  with 
Ferdinand's  rule,  were  eager  to  rise  on  Ulrich's  behalf.  It  was  in 
vain  that  Luther  and  Melanchthon  prophesied  woe  for  this  contempt 
of  their  doctrine  of  passive  obedience.  Philip  knew  the  feebleness  of  the 
foe ;  Ferdinand's  appeals  to  Charles  had  met  with  a  cold  response,  and 
his  lieutenant  in  Wiirttemberg,  Count  Philip  of  the  Palatinate,  could 
hardly  raise  9000  foot  and  400  horse.  With  this  little  army  he  waited 
at  Lauffen,  where  on  May  12-13  an  encounter,  which  can  scarcely  be 
called  a  battle,  was  decided  against  him,  mainly  by  the  excellence  of 
the  Hessian  horse  and  artillery.  Before  the  end  of  June  the  whole  of 
Wiirttemberg  had  been  overrun  by  the  invaders,  and  Luther  had  dis- 
cerned the  hand  of  God  in  the  victors'  triumph. 

Nor  was  there  any  hope  of  retrieving  the  disaster  ;  rather,  Ferdinand 
dreaded  lest  Philip  should  with  the  help  of  the  Anabaptists  raise  a 
general  insurrection  against  the  Habsburgs,  and  seize  the  imperial  crown 
for  himself,  the  Dauphin  of  France,  or  Duke  William  of  Bavaria. 
Francis  I  regarded  Wiirttemberg  as  only  a  beginning,  and  was  urging 
Philip  on  to  fresh  conquests,  which  would  have  helped  him  in  his 
impending  war  with  Charles.  But  the  German  Princes  were  content 
with  securing  their  immediate  objects  without  becoming  the  cat's-paw 
of  France,  and  peace  was  made  with  Ferdinand  at  Cadan  on  June  29. 
Ulrich  was  restored  to  Wiirttemberg,  but  Ferdinand's  pride  was  to  some 
extent  saved  by  the  provision  that  the  duchy  was  to  be  held  as  a  fief  of 
Austria  —  without  however  impairing  its  imperial  status  —  and  should 
pass  to  the  Habsburgs  in  the  default  of  male  heirs  in  Ulrich's  line  ;  at 
the  same  time  Ferdinand  withdrew  his  original  stipulation  that  the 
Reformation  should  not  be  established  in  Wiirttemberg. 

The  Protestants,  however,  were  bent  upon  more  than  a  local  victory 
for  their  faith,  and  they  employed  their  advantage  over  Ferdinand  to 
render  more  secure  their  general  position  in  Germany.  The  great  defect 
in  the  Niirnberg  Peace  of  1532  was  the  absence  of  any  definition  of  the 
"  religious  cases  "  with  which  the  ReicTiskammergerieht  was  prohibited 
from  dealing.  When  the  Court  appealed  to  Charles  on  the  point,  he 
replied  that  it  was  their  business  to  determine  what  was,  and  what  was 
not,  a  "  religious  "  suit  ;  and  as  the  Court  was  composed  of  Catholics  it 
naturally  asserted  its  jurisdiction  in  all  suits  about  ecclesiastical  property. 
But  secularisation  of  Church  property  Avas  the  financial  basis  of  the 
reformed  Churches,  and  by  this  time  was  also  one  of  the  main  financial 
supports  of  Lutheran  States.  If  they  could  be  attacked  on  this  ground 
the  Peace  of  Niirnberg  was  of  little  value  to  them  ;  and  they  grew  more 
and  more  exasperated  as  the  Kammergerieht  proceeded  to  condemn  cities 
and  Princes  such  as  Strassburg,  and  Niirnberg,  Duke  Ernest  of  Liineburg 
and  Margrave  George  of  Brandenburg.  Eventually,  on  January  30,  1534, 


222  Revolutionary  movements 

the  Protestants  formally  repudiated  the  Kammergericht  as  a  partisan 
body,  thus  rejecting  the  last  existing  national  institution,  for  the 
Reichsregiment  was  already  dissolved.  This  however  afforded  them  no 
protection,  and  in  the  Peace  of  Cadan  they  insisted  that  Ferdinand  should 
quash  all  such  proceedings  of  the  Chamljer  as  were  directed  against  the 
members  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League.  With  this  demand  the  King  was 
forced  to  comply  ;  the  only  compensation  he  received  was  the  withdrawal 
of  the  Elector  of  Saxony's  opposition  to  his  recognition  as  King  of  the 
Romans.  It  was  no  wonder  that  men  declared  that  Philip  of  Hesse  had 
done  more  for  the  Reformation  by  his  Wiirttemberg  enterprise  than 
Luther  could  do  in  a  thousand  books. 

Other  causes  than  the  weakness  of  Ferdinand  and  the  disinclination 
of  Lutherans  to  promote  the  ends  of  Francis  I  moved  Catholic  and 
Protestant  Princes  to  the  Peace  of  Cadan.  Both  alike  were  threatened 
b}'  their  common  foe,  the  spirit  of  revolution,  which  in  two  different 
forms  had  now  submerged  Catholic  Miinster  and  Protestant  Liibeck. 
Of  the  two  phenomena  the  Anabaptist  reign  at  Miinster  was  the  more  to 
be  feared  and  the  harder  to  be  explained,  for  the  term  by  Avhich  it  is 
known  represents  a  mere  accident  of  the  movement  as  being  its  essence. 
It  was  not  essentially  theological,  nor  is  "  anabaptist "  an  adequate  or 
accurate  expression  of  its  theological  peculiarities.  The  doctrines  of 
second  baptism  and  adult  baptism  are  inoffensive  enough,  but  attempts 
to  realise  the  millennium,  if  successful,  would  be  fatal  to  most  forms  of 
government,  and  a  familiar  parallel  to  the  Miinster  revolutionists  may 
be  found  in  the  English  Fifth-monarchy  men  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
In  both  cases  millenary  doctrines  were  only  the  outward  form  in  which 
the  revolutionary  spirit  was  made  manifest,  and  the  spirit  of  revolution 
is  always  at  bottom  the  same  because  it  has  its  roots  in  the  depths  of 
human  nature.  The  motive  force  which  roased  the  English  peasants  in 
1381  was  essentially  the  same  as  that  which  dominated  iMiinster  in  1534 
and  lined  the  barricades  of  Paris  in  1848.  The  revolutionist  becomes  a 
believer  in  the  brotherhood  of  man,  in  the  perfectibility  of  the  race, 
and  in  the  practicability  of  the  millennium.  The  narrower  his  experience 
of  men  and  affairs,  the  wider  his  flights  of  fancy  ;  and  revolutionary 
principles  commonly  find  their  most  fruitful  soil  among  hand-workers 
of  sedentary  occupation  and  straitened  circumstances.  In  those  sub- 
merged classes  materials  for  discontent  ever  abound,  awaiting  the  coin- 
cidence of  two  events  to  set  them  free,  the  flash  of  vision  into  better 
things  and  the  disturbance  of  the  repressive  force  of  law  and  order. 
The  Reformation  produced  them  both  ;  and  the  new  gospel  of  Divine 
justice  for  the  oppressed  set  the  volcanic  flood  in  motion,  and  strife 
between  Catholic  and  Protestant  authorities  gave  it  a  vent. 

It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  the  rigid,  respectable  condition  into 
which  Lutheranism  had  sunk  under  the  aegis  of  territorial  Princes  or 
even  the  more  elastic  religion  of   Zwingli  would  satisfy  all  of  those 


Growth  of  sects  223 


who  had  revolted  from  Rome.  Extreme  opinions  soon  became  heard. 
Sebastian  Franck  declared  that  in  the  new  Lutheran  Church  there  was 
less  freedom  of  speech  and  belief  than  among  the  Turks  and  heathen  ; 
and  Leo  Jud  described  Luther  as  another  Pope  who  consigned  at  will 
some  to  the  devil,  and  rewarded  others  with  heaven.  Luther  had  found 
his  original  strength  in  the  spirit  of  revolutionary  enthusiasm  and  reli- 
gious exaltation  ;  but  as  soon  as  the  way  was  clear  he  exchanged  the 
support  of  popular  agitation  for  that  of  secular  authority,  and  left  the 
revolutionists  to  follow  their  own  devices.  Their  ranks  were  swollen  by 
a  general  feeling  of  disappointment  at  the  meagre  results  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. The  moral  regeneration  which  had  been  anticipated,  the  ameliora- 
tion of  social  ills,  and  the  reform  of  political  abuses  seemed  as  far  off  as 
ever.  "  The  longer  we  preach  the  Gospel,"  declared  Luther,  "  the  deeper 
the  people  plunge  into  greed,  pride,  and  luxury  "  ;  and,  acting  on  a  princi- 
ple enunciated  by  the  Reformers  themselves,  men  began  to  ascribe  the  evil 
practice  in  Lutheran  spheres  to  the  errors  in  Lutheran  doctrine.  Hence 
arose  a  number  of  theological  ideas,  which  were  anathema  alike  to 
Catholics  and  Protestants,  but  appealed  with  irresistible  force  to  multi- 
tudes who  found  no  solace  in  either  of  the  more  orthodox  creeds.  The 
mass  of  the  peasantry  had  been  put  out  of  the  pale  of  hope  in  1525, 
and  their  complete  indifference  to  ideas  of  any  kind  prevented  a  general 
rising  ten  years  later  ;  but  in  some  of  the  towns  the  lower  classes  retained 
enough  mental  buoyancy  to  seek  consolation  in  dreams  for  the  burdens 
they  bore  in  real  life. 

The  Anabaptist  doctrine  was  but  one  of  an  endless  variety  of  ideas, 
many  of  which  had  long  been  current.  All  such  opinions  gained  fresh 
vogue  in  the  decade  following  the  Peasants'  Revolt  ;  but  most  of  the 
"  sectaries  "  agreed  in  repudiating  Luther's  views  on  predestination  and 
the  unfree  will,  and  denounced  the  dependence  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  upon  the  State.  They  denied  the  right  of  the  secular 
magistrate  to  interfere  in  religious  matters,  and  themselves  withdrew 
in  varying  degrees  from  concern  in  the  affairs  of  this  world.  Some, 
anticipating  the  Quakers,  refused  to  bear  arms  ;  the  Gdrtnerhruder  of 
Salzburg  endeavoured  to  live  on  the  pattern  of  primitive  simplicity. 
One  sect  denied  the  humanity  of  Christ ;  another,  of  whom  Ludwig 
Hetzer  was  the  chief,  began  by  regarding  Jesus  as  a  leader  and  teacher 
rather  than  an  object  of  worship,  and  ended  by  denying  His  divinity. 
Many  thoughtful  people,  repelled  by  the  harshness  of  Luther's  dogmas, 
insisted  upon  mercy  as  the  pre-eminent  attribute  of  God,  and  extended 
even  to  the  devil  the  hope  of  salvation  ;  while  the  idea  that  the  flesh 
alone  sinned  leaving  the  spirit  undefiled  proved  attractive  to  the  lower 
sort  and  opened  the  door  to  a  variety  of  antinomian  speculations  and 
practices. 

Most  of  these  dreamers  indulged  in  Apocalyptic  visions  of  an  imme- 
diate purification  of  the  world  ;  but  this  at  worst  was  only  a  species  of 


224  Revolutionists  in  North  Germany 

quiet  spiritual  dram-drinking,  and  probably  it  would  have  gone  no  further 
but  for  the  ruthless  persecution  which  their  doctrines  called  down  upon 
them.  Zwingli  himself  was  hostile  to  them,  and  repressive  measures 
were  taken  against  their  Swiss  adherents  ;  but  in  most  parts  of  Germany 
they  were  condemned  to  wholesale  death.  Six  hundred  executions  are 
said  to  have  taken  place  at  Ensisheim  in  Upper  Elsass,  a  thousand  in 
Tyrol  and  Gorz,  and  the  Swabian  League  butchered  whole  bands  of 
them  without  trial  or  sentence.  Many  were  beheaded  in  Saxony  with 
the  express  approbation  of  Luther,  who  regarded  their  heroism  in  the 
face  of  death  as  proof  of  diabolic  possession.  Duke  William  of  Bavaria 
made  a  distinction  between  those  who  recanted  and  those  who  re- 
mained obdurate  ;  the  latter  were  burnt,  the  former  were  only  beheaded. 
Bucer  at  Strassburg  was  less  truculent  tlian  Luther ;  but  Philip  of  Hesse 
was  the  only  Prince  of  sufficient  moderation  to  be  content  with  the 
heretics'  incarceration. 

The  doctrine  of  passive  resistance  broke  down  under  treatment  like 
this,  and  men's  sufferings  began  to  set  their  hands  as  well  as  their  minds 
in  motion  ;  a  conviction  developed  that  it  was  their  duty  to  assist  in 
effecting  the  purification  which  they  believed  to  be  imminent.  In 
Augsburg,  Hans  Hut  proclaimed  the  necessity  incumbent  upon  the 
saints  to  purify  the  world  with  a  double-edged  sword,  and  his  disciple, 
Augustin  Bader,  prepared  a  crown,  insignia,  and  jewels  for  his  future 
kingdom  in  Israel.  Melchior  Hofmann  told  Frederick  I  of  Denmark 
that  he  was  one  of  the  two  sovereigns  at  whose  hands  all  the  firstborn 
of  Egypt  should  be  slain.  Not  till  the  vials  of  wrath  had  been  out- 
poured could  the  kingdom  of  heaven  come.  Hofmann,  who  had  preached 
"  the  true  gospel "  in  Livonia  and  then  had  combated  Luther's  magical 
doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  at  Stockholm,  Kiel,  and  Strassburg,  had  by  his 
voice  and  his  pen  acquired  great  influence  over  the  artisans  of  northern 
Germany ;  and  here,  where  men's  dreams  had  not  been  rudely  dispelled  by 
the  ravages  of  peasants  and  reprisals  of  Princes,  revolutionary  ideas  took 
their  deepest  root  and  revolutionary  projects  appeared  most  feasible. 
From  1529  onwards  there  were  outbreaks  in  not  a  few  North  German 
towns,  at  Minden,  Herford,  Lippstadt,  and  Soest  ;  but  it  was  at  Miinster 
and  Liibeck  that  the  revolution  in  two  different  forms  assumed  a  world- 
wide importance. 

Miinster  had  long  been  a  scene  of  strife  between  Catholic  and 
Protestant.  The  Lutheran  attack  was  at  first  repelled  by  the  Catholics, 
and  Bernard  Rottman,  the  most  prominent  of  the  Reforming  divines,  was 
expelled  from  the  city.  But  he  soon  returned  and  established  himself  in 
the  suburbs,  where  his  preaching  produced  such  an  effect  on  the  populace 
that  the  Reformers  became  a  majority  on  the  Council  and  secured  control 
of  the  city  churches.  In  1532  the  Chapter  and  the  rest  of  the  Catholic 
clergy,  with  the  minority  of  the  Council,  left  Miinster  to  concert  measures 
of  retaliation  with  Count  Franz  von  Waldeck,  the  newly-elected  Bishop 


1533-4] 


The  Netherlands  and  Munster  225 


of  Munster,  and  with  the  neighbouring  gentry,  who  for  the  most  part 
adhered  to  the  okl  religion.  By  their  action  all  communication  between 
the  city  and  the  external  world  was  cut  off ;  but,  threatened  with  the 
loss  of  their  rents  and  commerce,  the  citizens  made  a  sally  on  December  26, 
surprised  the  Bishop  and  the  chiefs  of  the  Catholic  party  in  their  head- 
quarters at  Telgte  (east  of  Munster),  and  carried  off  a  number  of  prisoners 
as  hostages.  Alarm  induced  the  Catholics  to  accept  a  compromise  in 
February,  by  which  Lutheranism  was  to  be  tolerated  in  the  six  parish 
churches,  and  Catholicism  in  the  Cathedral  and  the  centre  of  the  city. 
Lutheranism,  however,  while  acceptable  to  the  wealthier  members  of 
the  reforming  party,  no  longer  satisfied  Rottman  and  the  artisans. 
Rottman  gradually  adopted  the  Zwinglian  view  of  the  Eucharist  and 
repudiated  infant  baptism  ;  and,  although  condemned  by  the  University 
of  Marburg  and  the  Council  of  Miinster,  he  was  not  expelled  from  the 
city,  but  continued  to  propagate  his  doctrines  among  the  lower  orders, 
and  eventually  in  1533  determined  to  strengthen  his  position  by  intro- 
ducing into  Munster  some  Anabaptists  from  Holland. 

In  the  Netherlands  Charles  V  was  enabled  by  the  strength  of  his 
position  as  territorial  prince  and  by  means  of  the  Inquisition  to  exer- 
cise an  authority  in  religious  matters  which  was  denied  him  in  Ger- 
man}^  but  his  repression  had  the  effect  of  stimulating  the  growth  of 
extremer  doctrines.  Schismatic  movements  had  long  been  endemic  in 
the  Netherlands,  and  nowhere  else  did  Melchior  Hofmann  find  so  many 
disciples.  Chief  among  them  were  Jan  Matthys,  a  baker  of  Haarlem, 
and  Jan  Beuckelssen  or  Bockelsohn,  popularly  known  as  Jan  of  Leyden. 
Matthys  declared  himself  to  be  the  Enoch  of  the  new  dispensation,  and 
chose  twelve  apostles  to  proselytise  the  six  neighbouring  provinces. 
Beuckelssen  was  one  of  them;  though  not  yet  thirty  years  of  age  he  had 
seen  much  of  the  world  ;  as  a  journeyman  tailor  he  had  travelled  over 
Europe  from  Liibeck  to  Lisbon;  abandoning  his  trade  he  opened  an  inn 
at  Leyden,  became  a  leading  member  of  the  local  Rederijkers,  and 
wrote  verses  and  dramas,  in  which  he  himself  played  a  part.  Finally  he 
fell  under  the  influence  of  the  Scriptural  teaching  of  Hofmann  and 
Matthys,  as  whose  forerunner  he  journeyed  to  Munster  in  January, 
1534,  and  joined  forces  with  Rottman  and  the  Munster  Anabaptists. 

The  arrival  of  Beuckelssen  and  his  colleagues  precipitated  the  conflict 
for  which  the  Catholics  and  Lutherans  had  armed  as  early  as  the  previous 
autumn.  After  a  few  days  of  ominous  silence  the  insurrection  broke 
out  on  February  9.  It  was  premature ;  the  Conservatives  were  still 
the  stronger  party,  but  in  a  moment  of  hesitation  they  consented  to 
mutual  toleration.  The  concession  was  fatal ;  in  a  fortnight  the  fanatical 
zeal  of  the  revolutionists  made  thousands  of  fresh  converts,  especially 
among  the  women ;  and  the  legal  security  they  had  won  in  Miinster 
attracted  crowds  of  their  fellow  sectaries  from  Holland  and  the  neigh- 
bouring German  towns.     Matthys  himself  appeared  on  the  scene;  at 


226  Character  of  the  Anabaptist  rule  [i534 

the  municipal  election  of  the  21st  the  Anabaptists  secured  a  majority 
on  the  Council ;  and  Knipperdollinck,  the  executioner  of  the  sect,  became 
Burgomaster.  Six  days  later  there  was  a  great  prayer-meeting  of  armed 
Anabaptists  in  the  town-hall.  Matthys  roused  himself  from  an  apparent 
trance  to  demand  in  the  name  of  God  the  expulsion  of  all  who  refused 
conversion.  Old  and  young,  mothers  with  infants  in  arms,  and  bare- 
footed children,  were  driven  out  into  the  snow  to  perish,  while  the  reign 
of  the  saints  began. 

Like  the  earliest  Christians  they  sought  to  have  all  things  in 
common,  and  as  a  commencement  they  confiscated  the  goods  of  the 
exiles.  To  ensure  primitive  simplicity  of  worship  they  next  destroyed 
all  images,  pictures,  manuscrij)ts,  and  musical  instruments  on  which  they 
could  lay  their  hands.  Tailors  and  shoemakers  were  enjoined  to  intro- 
duce no  new  fashions  in  wearing  apparel ;  gold  and  silver  and  jewels 
were  surrendered  to  the  common  use  ;  and  there  was  an  idea  of  pushing 
the  communistic  principle  to  its  logical  extreme  by  repudiating  indi- 
vidual property  in  wives.  The  last  was  apparently  offensive  to  public 
opinion  even  in  purified  Miinster,  and  the  nearest  approach  to  it  effected 
in  practice  was  polygamy,  which  was  not  introduced  without  some  san- 
guinary opposition,  and  did  not  probably  extend  far  beyond  the  circle 
of  Beuckelssen  and  the  leaders  of  the  movement.  These  eccentricities 
were  regarded  by  their  authors  as  a  necessary  preparation  for  the  second 
coming  of  Christ.  That  the  end  of  the  world  was  at  hand  was  a  common 
idea  of  the  day.  No  one  was  more  thoroughly  possessed  by  it  than 
Luther;  but  while  he  set  little  store  on  the  Book  of  Revelation,  the 
Anabaptists  of  Miinster  found  in  it  their  chief  inspiration.  They 
conceived  that  they  were  making  straight  the  path  of  the  Lord  by 
abolishing  all  human  ordinances  such  as  property,  marriage,  and  social 
distinctions.  The  notion  was  not  entirely  new;  at  one  end  of  the 
religious  scale  the  Taborites  had  held  somewhat  similar  views,  and  at 
the  other,  monastic  life  was  also  based  on  renunciation  of  private 
property,  of  marriage,  and  of  the  privilege  of  rank.  The  idea  of 
preparing  for  the  Second  Advent  gave  the  movement  its  strength,  and 
stimulated  the  revolutionists  of  Miinster  to  resist  for  a  year  and  a  half 
the  miseries  of  a  siege  and  all  the  forces  which  Germany  could  bring 
against  them. 

Tlie  rule  of  INIatthys  the  prophet  was  brought  to  a  sudden  end  by 
his  death  in  a  sortie  at  Easter,  and  his  mantle  fell  upon  Jan  of  Leyden, 
probably  a  worse  but  certainly  an  abler  man.  His  introduction  of 
polygamy  provoked  resistance  from  the  respectable  section  led  by 
MoUenbeck,  but  they  were  mercilessly  butchered  after  surrender.  "He 
who  fires  the  first  shot,"  cried  Jan,  in  words  which  might  have  been 
borrowed  from  Luther's  attack  on  the  peasants,  "does  God  a  service." 
After  his  victory  he  dispensed  with  the  twelve  elders  who  had  nominally 
ruled  the  new  Israel,  and  by  the  mouth  of  his  prophet  Dusentschur 


1534-5]         The  Anabaptists  sujypressed  at  Munster  227 

announced  it  as  the  will  of  God  that  he  should  be  king  of  all  the  world 
and  establish  the  Fifth  Monarchy  of  the  Apocalypse.  He  assumed  the 
pomp  and  circumstance  of  royalty,  easily  crushed  an  attempt  of  Knip- 
perdollinck  to  supplant  him,  defeated  the  besiegers  with  much  slaughter 
on  August  30,  1534,  when  they  tried  to  take  the  city  by  storm,  and  in 
October  sent  out  twenty-eight  apostles  to  preach  the  new  kingdom  to 
the  neighbouring  cities.  They  were  armed  with  Dusentschur's  proph- 
ecy of  ruin  for  such  as  did  them  harm  ;  but  almost  all  were  seized  and 
executed,  and  a  young  woman,  who  attempted  to  play  the  part  of  Judith 
to  the  Holofernes  of  the  Bishop  of  Miinster,  met  with  a  similar  fate. 

These  misfortunes  probably  dimmed  the  faith  of  the  besieged  in 
Miinster.  Although  there  were  thousands  of  Anabaptists  scattered 
throughout  the  north  of  Germany  and  the  Netherlands,  their  sporadic 
risings  were  all  suppressed,  and  no  town  but  Warendorf  accepted 
Miinster's  proposals  of  peace.  The  Wiirttemberg  war,  which  had  dis- 
tracted the  Princes  of  Germany,  was  over;  and  the  Liibeck  war  prevented 
Hanseatic  democrats  from  assisting  the  people  of  Miinster  as  effectually 
as  it  kept  North  German  Princes  from  joining  the  siege.  But  it  was 
April,  1535,  before  the  mutual  jealousies  of  the  various  Princes,  the 
dissensions  between  Catholics  and  Protestants,  the  inefficiency  of  the 
national  military  organisation,  and  the  common  fear  lest  Charles  V  should 
seize  the  occasion  to  extend  his  Burgundian  patrimony  at  the  expense 
of  Germany  by  appropriating  Miinster  to  himself,  permitted  a  joint 
expedition  in  aid  of  the  Bishop  of  Miinster,  who  had  hitherto  carried  on 
the  siege  with  the  help  of  some  Hessian  troops.  After  that  the  result 
could  not  long  remain  doubtful  ;  but  the  city  offered  a  stubborn  resist- 
ance, and  it  was  only  by  means  of  treachery  that  it  was  taken  by  assault 
on  the  night  of  June  24.  The  usual  slaughter  followed  ;  Jan  of  Leyden 
and  KnipperdoUinck  were  tortured  to  death  in  the  market-place  with 
red-hot  pincers.  Munster  was  deprived  of  its  privileges  as  an  imperial 
city ;  the  Bishop's  authority  and  Catholicism  were  re-established,  and  a 
fortress  was  built  to  support  them.  The  Anabaptists  were  dispersed 
into  many  lands,  and  their  views  exercised  a  potent  influence  in  England 
and  America  in  the  following  century  ;  but  the  visionary  and  revo- 
lutionary spirit  which  gave  Anabaptism  its  importance  during  the 
German  Reformation  passed  out  of  it  to  assume  other  forms,  and 
Anabaptism  slowly  became  a  respectable  creed. 

Two  of  the  three  revolutions  which  disturbed  Germany  in  1534-5, 
the  Wiirttemberg  war  and  the  Miinster  insurrection,  were  thus  ended  ; 
there  remained  a  third,  the  attempt  of  commercial  democracy  to  establish 
an  empire  over  the  shores  of  the  Baltic.  The  cities  of  the  Hanseatic 
League  had  long  enjoyed  the  most  complete  autonomy,  and  whatever 
authority  neighbouring  Princes  and  Prelates  could  claim  within  the  walls 
of  any  of  them  was  a  mere  shadow.  Hence  the  Lutheran  Reformation, 
appealing  as  it  did  most  powerfully  to  the  burgher  class,  won  an  easy 


228  Lubeck  and  the  Scandinavian  North 


and  an  early  victory  in  most  of  these  trading  communities.  But  this 
victory  was  the  beginning  rather  than  the  end  of  strife,  for  the  social 
ferment  which  followed  on  the  religious  revolt  inevitably  produced  a 
division  between  the  richer  and  poorer  classes.  It  bore  little  relation 
to  differences  on  religious  questions,  though  here  as  elsewhere  in  the 
sixteenth  century  every  movement  tended  to  assume  a  theological  garb, 
and  the  rich  naturally  favoured  conservative  forms  of  religion,  while  the 
poor  adopted  novel  doctrines.  Thus  risings  at  Hanover  in  1533,  at 
Bremen  in  1530-2,  and  at  Brunswick  in  1528  were  directed  partly 
against  the  old  Church  and  partly  against  the  aristocratic  Town  Councils. 
The  chief  of  these  municipal  revolutions  occurred  at  Lubeck  and  Stral- 
sund,  but,  although  the  triumph  of  the  democracy  was  accompanied  by 
a  good  deal  of  iconoclasm,  and  WuUenwever,  the  leader  of  the  Liibeck 
populace,  was  accused  of  Anabaptism,  the  struggle  was  really  social 
and  political,  or,  according  to  Sastrow,  the  burgomaster  of  Greifswald, 
between  the  respectable  and  the  disreputable  classes.  In  both  cities  the 
oligarchic  character  of  the  Town  Council  was  abolished,  and  power  was 
transferred  to  demagogues  depending  on  the  support  of  the  artisans  ; 
but  the  importance  of  these  changes  consists  not  so  much  in  their  con- 
stitutional aspect,  though  this  was  of  considerable  significance,  as  in  the 
effect  they  produced  upon  the  external  policy  of  the  Hanseatic  League. 

That  famous  organisation  had  lost  much  of  the  power  it  wielded  in 
the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries.  Its  position  was  based  on  a 
union  between  the  so-called  Wendic  cities  of  the  Baltic  and  the  towns 
of  Westphalia  and  the  Netherlands,  and  upon  the  control  which  they 
exercised  over  the  united  Scandinavian  kingdoms,  and  thus  over  the 
whole  trade  of  the  Baltic  and  the  North  Sea.  The  most  potent  voice 
in  the  confederation  had  hitherto  been  that  of  Lubeck,  but  the  develop- 
ment of  Bruges  and  Antwerp  under  the  fostering  care  of  their  Burgundian 
rulers  provoked  a  bitter  rivahy  between  the  Flemings  and  the  League  ; 
Liibeck  insisted  upon  the  exclusion  of  Dutch  trade  from  the  Baltic,  and 
the  Dutch  naturally  resented  this  limitation  of  their  commerce.  At  the 
same  time  this  loosening  of  the  bond  between  the  eastern  and  western 
cities  weakened  the  League's  hold  on  the  Scandinavian  kingdoms  ;  and 
Christian  II,  who  had  married  Charles  V's  sister,  conceived  the  idea  of 
utilising  his  Burgundian  allies  for  the  purpose  of  breaking  the  domina- 
tion of  the  Baltic  cities.  The  plan  was  ruined  by  Christian's  vices,  which 
gained  him  the  hatred  of  all  his  subjects  and  enabled  the  Liibeckers, 
by  timely  assistance  to  Christian's  uncle,  Frederick,  Duke  of  Holstein, 
to  evict  their  enemy  from  the  throne  of  Denmark  and  Norway  ;  similar 
aid  was  rendered  to  Gustavus  Vasa,  who  in  the  same  year  (1523)  drove 
Christian  out  of  Sweden  ;  and  thus  the  union  of  the  three  Scandinavian 
kingdoms  which  had  lasted  since  the  Peace  of  Kalmar  (1397)  was 
permanently  broken  up. 

Christian,  however,  was  not  content  with  his  defeat,  and  with  a 


1533]  Wullenwever  at  Lilheck  229 

view  to  securing  the  assistance  of  his  Habsburg  brothers-in-law  and 
of  Catholic  Europe,  he  abjured  his  Lutheranism  and  represented  his 
attempt  to  regain  his  thrones  as  a  crusade  against  heresy.  In  1531-2 
he  overran  Norway,  but  Liibeck  blockaded  the  coast,  forced  him  to 
capitulate,  and  procured  his  lifelong  imprisonment  at  Sonderburg. 
This  outrage  on  roj^al  majesty,  coupled  with  the  mercantile  hostility 
between  Liibeck  and  the  Netherlands,  precipitated  naval  war  between 
the  Dutch  and  Baltic  cities  ;  and  the  situation  was  complicated  by  the 
death  of  Frederick  I  in  April,  1533.  Several  claimants  for  his  vacant 
throne  appeared.  Frederick  left  two  sons,  Christian  III,  a  Lutheran,  and 
John,  who  seems  to  have  entertained  some  hopes  of  maintaining  his 
pretensions  by  the  help  of  the  Catholic  party.  The  old  King,  Christian  II, 
was  regarded  as  impossible,  and  the  Habsburgs  put  forward  as  their 
candidate  Count  Frederick  of  the  Palatinate  (afterwards  the  Elector 
Palatine  Frederick  II),  who  married  old  Christian's  daughter.  Such 
wasthe  situation  with  which  the  democrats  of  Liibeck,  who  had  obtained 
control  of  the  Council  in  February  and  elected  Jiirgen  Wullenwever 
Burgomaster  in  March,  1533,  had  to  deal. 

The  distrust  with  which  the  revolutionists  of  Liibeck  were  viewed 
by  both  Protestant  and  Catholic  Princes  made  Wullenwever's  course  a 
difficult  one.  Hestarted  for  Copenhagen  to  conclude  an  alliance  between 
the  two  cities,  but  Copenhagen  looked  on  him  askance,  and  he  then 
offered  his  friendship  to  the  3'oung  Christian  III  with  no  better  result. 
Liibeck,  however,  found  an  unexpected  ally  in  Henry  VIII,  who  was  then 
trying  every  means  to  reduce  the  Habsburg  power,  and  regarded  with 
alarm  the  prospect  of  a  Habsburg  victory  in  Denmark.  Marx  Meyer^ 
a  military  adventurer  who  had  taken  service  under  Liibeck,  had  been 
sent  to  sea  in  command  of  a  fleet  against  the  Dutch.  Landing  in 
England  without  a  passport,  he  had  been  lodged  in  the  Tower  of 
London  ;  but  Henry  saw  in  him  a  convenient  instrument  against  the 
Habsburgs.  He  conferred  on  Meyer  a  knighthood,  and  promised  Liibeck 
assistance  ;  while  the  Liibeckers  undertook  to  tolerate  no  Prince  upon 
the  Danish  throne  of  whom  the  English  King  did  not  approve.  But 
Henry's  promises  were  not  very  serious,  and  the  Liibeckers  were  wise  in 
not  putting  too  much  trust  in  them.  They  were  better  advised  in 
concluding  a  four  years'  truce  with  the  Netherlands  at  the  price  of  free 
trade  through  the  Sound  in  order  to  concentrate  their  efforts  upon 
establishing  their  control  over  Denmark. 

The  element  on  which  they  relied  was  the  democratic  spirit  in  the 
Scandinavian  kingdoms  and  particularly  in  the  towns.  MelchiorHofmann 
had  preached  at  Stockholm,  where  Gustavus  Vasa  declared  that  the 
populace  aimed  at  his  assassination.  At  Malmo  and  Copenhagen  the 
Burgomasters  eventually  adopted  W  ullenwever's  views,  and  both  peasants 
and  artisans  in  Denmark  were  excited  and  discontented.  The  expulsion 
of  the  old  King  Christian  had  been  in  the  main  an  aristocratic  revolution. 


230  The  Grafenfehde  in  Denmark  [1533-5 

abetted  by  Liibeck  in  revenge  for  Christian's  attacks  on  her  mercantile 
monopoly ;  and  the  rule  of  Frederick  I  had  been  marked  by  aristocratic 
infringements  of  the  commercial  privileges  of  the  townsfolk  and  by 
oppression  of  the  peasants.  Both  classes  were  ready  to  rise  for  their  old 
Bauernkonig ;  and  Liibeck,  aware  that  Christian  would  be  a  puppet  in 
her  hands,  determined  to  restore  the  sovereign  whom  ten  years  before 
she  had  deposed.  The  town  took  into  its  service  Count  Christopher  of 
Oldenburg,  a  competent  soldier,  albeit  a  canon  of  Cologne,  and  stipulated 
in  case  of  success  for  the  cession  of  Gothland,  Helsingborg,  and  Helsingor. 
In  Ma}^  1534,  Christopher  arrived  at  Liibeck,  and,  having  won  a  few 
trifling  successes  over  Duke  Christian,  he  put  to  sea  Avitli  a  powerful 
fleet  and  appeared  off  Copenhagen  in  June.  Everywhere  almost  popular 
insurrections  broke  out  in  favour  of  the  old  King  or  against  the  ruling 
nobility.  This  war  was  called  the  G-rafenfeJide^  and  it  was  in  the  name 
of  the  "  Peasant  King  "  that  Christopher  summoned  the  town  and  county 
proletariate  to  rise  against  their  lords.  Seeland,  Copenhagen,  Laaland, 
Langeland,  and  Falster  once  more  recognised  him  as  their  sovereign  ; 
revolts  of  the  peasants  in  Flinen  and  Jutland  led  to  a  similar  recognition, 
while  Oldendorp,  whom  Wullenwever  describes  as  the  originator  of  the 
movement,  roused  some  of  the  Swedish  cities.  The  Liibeck  revolu- 
tionists seemed  to  be  carrying  all  before  them ;  democratic  factions 
triumphed  at  Stralsund,  Rostock,  Riga,  and  Reval,  and  sent  contribu- 
tions in  men  or  mone}^  to  the  common  cause.  In  Liibeck  itself  Wullen- 
wever strengthened  his  position  by  expelling  the  hostile  minority  from 
the  Council,  and  Bonnus,  the  Lutheran  superintendent,  resigned  his 
charge.  "  Had  the  cities  succeeded  as  they  hoped,"  wrote  a  Pomeranian 
chronicler,  "  not  a  Prince  or  a  noble  would  have  been  left." 

The  revolution  at  Miinster  was  now  at  its  height,  and  the  Princes 
and  nobles  were  aware  of  their  peril  ;  but  the  Wiirttemberg  war  also  was 
raging,  and  they  were  compelled  to  content  themselves  with  denouncing 
the  action  of  Liibeck,  leaving  to  Duke  Christian  the  task  of  effective 
resistance.  He  proved  equal  to  the  occasion.  In  September  he  com- 
pletely blockaded  the  mouth  of  the  Trave  and  cut  off  Liibeck  from 
communication  with  the  sea.  The  city  was  compelled  to  restore  all  the 
territory  it  had  taken  from  Holstein,  but  both  parties  were  left  free  to 
carry  on  hostilities  in  Denmark.  There  the  Estates,  threatened  by 
internal  revolts  and  external  foes,  had  elected  Duke  Christian  King,  and 
in  December  he  captured  Aalborg  and  pacified  Jutland.  He  was  helped 
by  contingents  from  three  Princes  connected  with  him  by  marriage,  the 
Dukes  of  Prussia  and  Pomerania  and  Gustavus  of  Sweden,  whose  throne 
had  been  offered  by  Liibeck  to  Albrecht  of  Mecklenburg.  Near  Assens 
in  Fiinen  on  June  11,  1535,  Christian's  general,  Johann  Rantzau, 
defeated  the  Liibeck  allies  under  Count  Johann  von  Hoya,  and  almost 
simultaneously  his  fleet,  commanded  by  the  Danish  admiral  Skram,  won 
a  less  decisive  victory  over  the  ships  of  Liibeck  off  Bornholm.     Fiinen 


1535-7]  Fall  of  WuUeiiwever  231 

and  Seeland  submitted,  and  in  August  Copenhagen  and  Malmo  alone 
held  out. 

These  disasters  were  fatal  to  Wullenwever's  power  in  Liibeck ;  during 
his  absence  in  Mecklenburg  the  restoration  of  the  conservatives  was 
effected  in  August.  WuUenwever  eventually  fell  into  the  hands  of 
the  Archbishop  of  Bremen,  was  delivered  to  the  Archbisliop's  brother, 
Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick,  and  put  to  death  in  September,  1537.  With 
the  ruin  of  his  party  the  prosecution  of  his  war  began  to  languish,  and 
in  1536  Christian  took  possession  of  Copenhagen  and  made  himself 
master  of  the  two  kingdoms  of  Denmark  and  Norway.  He  was  crowned 
by  the  Lutheran  apostle  Bugenhagen,  under  whose  auspices  religion 
according  to  the  straitest  sect  of  Wittenberg  was  established  in  Denmark. 
Christian's  triumph  was  no  doubt  largely  due  to  national  antipathy  to 
the  domineering  interference  of  an  alien  State,  but  the  national  feeling 
was  exploited  by  class  prejudice,  and  the  aristocracy  in  Denmark  turned 
their  victory  to  the  same  use  as  the  German  Princes  did  theirs  in  the 
Peasants'  War.  In  both  cases  Lutheranism  made  common  cause  with 
the  upper  classes  ;  the  proclamation  of  the  Gospel  and  the  enforcement 
of  serfdom  went  hand  in  hand,  but  the  landlord  was  the  predominant 
partner,  and  even  the  children  of  preachers  remained  in  the  status  of  serfs. 

To  Liibeck  itself  it  is  possible  that  the  success  of  Wullenwever's 
grandiose  ideas  of  mercantile  empire  might  have  been  more  fatal 
than  their  failure.  According  to  Baltic  nautical  ballads  Liibeck  long 
regretted  its  turbulent  Burgomaster,  and  his  name  is  surrounded  in 
popular  legend  with  something  of  the  halo  of  a  van  Artevelde,  but  his 
attempt  to  clothe  the  new  democratic  spirit  in  the  worn-out  garb  of 
the  city-empire  was  doomed  from  the  first  to  end  in  disaster.  He  could 
not  have  permanently  averted  the  decay  of  the  Hanse  towns  or  pre- 
vented the  absorption  of  most  of  them  in  the  growing  territorial  States  ; 
temporary  success  would  only  have  prolonged  the  struggle  without 
affecting  the  last  result.  Besides  the  local  circumstances  which  would 
have  rendered  ineffectual  the  endeavour  of  Liibeck,  under  whatever  form 
of  municipal  government  it  might  have  been  made,  to  establish  an  im- 
perial State,  there  was  no  element  of  stability  in  the  revolutionary  spirit 
of  which  that  endeavour  was  the  last  manifestation.  The  future  of 
Germany  was  bound  up  with  the  fortunes  of  the  territorial  principle,  and 
it  is  impossible  to  determine  exactly  in  what  degree  the  Lutheran 
Reformation  owed  its  salvation  to  its  own  inherent  vitality,  and 
in  what  to  its  alliance  with  the  prevailing  political  organisation. 
Together  Lutheranism  and  territorialism  had  crushed  the  revolutionary 
movement,  whether  it  took  the  form  of  agrarian  socialism,  Miinster 
Anabaptism,  or  urban  democracy.  From  the  conflict  of  creeds  all  but 
two  had  now  been  eliminated,  Catholicism  and  Lutheranism  ;  both  were 
equally  linked  with  the  territorial  principle,  and,  whichever  prevailed, 
the  political  texture  of  Germany  would  still  be  the  same.     The  subsidence 


232  Dangers  of  the  Protestants  [1535-6 

of  the  revolutionary  spirit  narrowed  the  field  of  contention,  and  the 
question  became  merely  one  of  fixing  the  limits  of  this  or  that  territorial 
State  and  of  locating  the  frontier  between  the  two  established  forms  of 
religion. 

Vet  peace  was  not  any  nearer  because  the  rivals  had  beaten  a  common 
foe.  The  agreement  of  Niirnberg  in  1532  had  guaranteed  to  the  members 
of  the  Schmalkaldic  League  immunity  for  their  religion,  but  it  did  not 
define  religion  or  provide  security  for  future  Protestants.  At  the  Peace 
of  Cadan  in  1534  the  first  point  was  settled  by  Ferdinand's  quashing 
all  the  processes  in  the  Reichskammergericht  against  the  Schmalkaldic 
allies  ;  but  the  protection  did  not  extend  beyond  the  members  of  the 
League,  and  numerous  other  Protestant  States  were  liable  to  practical 
ruin  as  the  result  of  the  Supreme  Court's  verdicts.  This  was  a  particularly 
dangerous  cause  of  friction,  because  Catholic  Princes  had  other  than 
religious  motives  for  executing  the  judgments  of  the  Court  against  their 
Protestant  neighbours  ;  as  executors  of  the  Court's  decrees  they  could 
legally  seize  the  lands  of  recalcitrant  cities  or  lords,  and  under  the  guise 
of  religion  extend  their  territorial  power.  Thus,  Duke  Eric  of  Brunswick- 
Calenberg  was  anxious  to  execute  sentence  on  his  chief  town,  Hanover, 
where  a  revolutionary  movement  had  taken  place  ;  the  Duke  of  Bavaria 
cast  longing  eyes  on  Augsburg  ;  and  the  specific  object  of  the  Catholic 
League  of  Halle  (1533)  was  to  secure  the  execution  of  verdicts  against 
all  cities  and  Princes  who  were  not  among  the  Schmalkaldic  confederates. 
The  Catholics  undoubtedly  had  the  law  on  their  side,  but  necessity 
drove  their  opponents  to  break  it.  They  could  hardly  stand  by  while 
their  fellow-countrymen  were  punished  for  holding  the  faith  they  held 
themselves  ;  had  they  done  so  they  would  only  have  prepared  the  way 
for  their  own  destruction.  The  obvious  method  of  protecting  their 
co-religionists  was  to  admit  them  to  the  Schmalkaldic  League  ;  but  this 
was  an  infraction  of  the  terms  of  the  Niirnberg  Peace  which  would 
endanger  their  own  security,  and  they  would  not  have  ventured  on  the 
step  unless  circumstances  had  tied  the  hands  of  the  Austrian  government. 

Throughout  the  greater  part  of  1535  Charles  V  was  engaged  in  the 
conquest  of  Tunis,  and  he  was  hoping  to  follow  up  his  success  in  this 
direction  with  an  attack  on  the  Turks,  who  were  embroiled  in  a  war  with 
Persia,  when  his  plans  were  disconcerted  by  the  hostile  attitude  of 
France.  Francesco  Sforza,  Duke  of  Milan,  died  in  1535  without  issue, 
and  Francis  I,  fearing  with  good  reason  that  Charles  would  seize 
the  duchy  himself,  revived  his  claims  to  Milan,  Genoa,  and  Asti.  In  the 
spring  of  1536  he  overran  Savoy,  which  had  become  the  Emperor's  ally, 
entered  into  negotiations  with  the  Turks  and  with  Henry  VIH  for  a 
joint  action  against  the  Habsburgs,  and  approached  the  Lutheran 
Princes  with  a  similar  object.  The  Lutherans  were  reluctant  to  side 
with  the  Emperor's  enemies,  but  they  had  no  hesitation  in  putting  a 
high  price  on  their  friendship,  and  in  turning  Charles'  necessities  to 


1534-6]    Ferdinand's  compromise  with  the  Protestants     233 

account  by  demanding  security  for  the  threatened  members  of  their 
Church.  In  December,  1535,  at  a  diet  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League, 
they  undertook  to  admit  all  who  would  subscribe  to  the  Confession 
of  Augsburg ;  and  Wiirttemberg,  Pomerania,  Anhalt,  and  the  cities  of 
Augsburg,  Frankfort,  Hanover,  and  Kempten  became  thus  entitled  to 
its  protection.  They  renewed  their  repudiation  of  the  Reichska^nmer- 
gericht  as  a  partisan  body,  and  declared  that  conscience  would  not  allow 
them  to  respect  its  verdicts.  They  refused  in  fact  to  yield  to  the 
national  and  imperial  authorities  that  obedience  in  religious  matters 
which  they  rigorously  exacted  from  the  subjects  of  their  own  territorial 
jurisdiction  ;  and  at  the  moment  when  they  were  pleading  conscience  as 
a  justification  of  their  own  conduct  they  declined  to  admit  its  validity 
when  urged  by  their  Catholic  brethren. 

The  Lutherans  had  not  remained  untainted  by  the  pride  of  power 
and  the  arrogance  of  success.  In  Ferdinand's  own  dominions  at  this 
time  Faber  declared  that  but  for  him  and  the  King  all  Vienna  would 
have  turned  Lutheran,  and  that  it  needed  but  a  sign  to  arm  all  Germany 
against  the  Roman  Church.  Ferdinand  himself  was  urging  such  con- 
cessions as  the  marriage  of  the  clergy  and  communion  under  both  kinds, 
and  complained  to  the  Papal  Nuncio  that  he  could  not  find  a  confessor 
who  was  not  a  fornicator,  a  drunkard,  or  an  ignoramus.  In  England 
Lutheranism  had  reached  its  highest  water-mark  in  Henry's  reign ; 
Melanchthon  had  dedicated  an  edition  of  hisLoci  Communes  to  the  Tudor 
King,  and  was  willing  to  undertake  a  voyage  to  England  to  reform  the 
English  Church.  Francis  I  had  invited  Melanchthon  and  Bucer  to 
France  to  discuss  the  religious  situation.  The  new  Pope,  Paul  III,  who 
had  succeeded  Clement  VII  in  1534,  began  his  pontificate  by  creating 
a  number  of  reforming  Cardinals,  and  sent  Vergerio  to  Germany  to 
investigate  the  possibilities  of  a  concordat  with  the  heretics  and  to 
ascertain  the  terms  upon  which  they  would  support  a  General  Council. 
In  all  the  Scandinavian  kingdoms  the  triumph  of  the  new  faith  was 
complete,  and  the  Protestant  seemed  to  be  the  winning  cause  in  Europe. 
Now,  when  Charles  was  threatened  with  a  joint  attack  by  Turks  and 
French,  it  was  no  time  to  throw  the  Lutheran  Princes  into  the  enemy's 
arras.  For  the  moment  temporal  security  was  a  more  urgent  need  than 
the  maintenance  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  the  suspension  of  all  the 
ecclesiastical  cases  in  the  Reichskammergericht  was  the  price  which 
Ferdinand  paid  for  the  Lutheran  rejection  of  alliance  with  Henry  VIII 
and  Francis  I. 

One  of  Ferdinand's  motives  was  fear  lest  Bavaria  should,  by  executing 
the  judicial  sentence  against  Augsburg,  acquire  predominant  influence  in 
that  important  city ;  and  he  was  by  no  means  averse  from  the  plan, 
proposed  by  the  Elector  John  Frederick  of  Saxony,  of  persuading 
Zwinglian  Augsburg  to  adopt  the  Lutheran  Confession  and  of  then 
admitting  it  to  the  Schmalkaldic  League.     Augsburg  was  thus  saved 


234  Divisions  among  the  Protestants  [1536-8 

from  what  Ferdinand  regarded  as  a  more  pernicious  form  of  heresy 
than  Lutheranism,  and  also  from  the  clutches  of  the  rival  House  of 
Wittelsbach.  The  way  for  this  conversion  was  prepared  by  the  Witten- 
berg Concord  of  1536.  The  hostility  between  the  Zwinglian  and 
Lutheran  sects  had  to  some  extent  subsided  since  Zwingli's  death. 
Melanchthon  had  modified  his  attitude  towards  predestination,  and  had 
been  much  impressed  by  Oecolampadius'  treatise  on  the  use  of  the 
Eucharist  during  the  first  three  centuries.  Luther  even  brought  himself 
to  entertain  a  friendly  feeling  for  Zwingli's  successor  BuUinger.  After 
various  preliminary  negotiations,  in  which  Bucer  was  as  usual  the  leading 
spirit,  a  conference  between  Luther  and  representatives  of  the  modified 
Zwinglianism  which  prevailed  in  the  cities  of  Upper  Germany  was  held 
in  Luther's  house  at  Wittenberg  in  May,  1536.  The  two  parties  agreed 
on  a  form  of  words  which  covered  their  differences  about  the  real  presence 
in  the  Eucharist ;  they  were  not  so  successful  with  regard  to  the  other 
disputed  point,  the  reception  of  the  body  of  Christ  by  unworthy  com- 
municants, but  they  agreed  to  differ.  Luther  expressed  himself  willing 
to  bury  the  past  and  roll  the  stone  upon  it,  and  extended  to  Bucer  and 
the  Upper  German  cities  that  "  brotherly  love  "  which  he  had  refused  to 
Zwingli  at  Marburg  in  1529. 

The  Concord  of  Wittenberg  only  stopped  but  for  a  while  the  rifts 
which  had  begun  to  appear  in  the  Schmalkaldic  Union.  The  mere  fact  of 
security  would  have  tended  to  relax  the  bonds,  and  there  were  personal 
as  well  as  religious  differencesbetween  John  Frederick  andPhilipof  Hesse. 
Philip  expressed  contempt  for  the  dull  but  honest  Elector,  while  John 
Frederick  had  grave  doubts  about  Philip's  orthodoxy  and  the  morality  of 
his  policy.  Philip  had  always  inclined  to  Zwinglian  views  and  resented 
dictation  from  Wittenberg ;  and  the  two  religious  parties  had  nearly 
come  to  an  open  breach  over  the  reformation  of  Wiirttemberg.  Ulrich 
himself  was  more  Zwinglian  than  Lutheran,  and  his  duchy  was  partitioned 
into  two  spheres  of  influence,  in  one  of  which  the  Lutheran  Schnepf 
laboured  and  in  the  other  the  Zwinglian  Blarer.  The  latter  proved  the 
stronger,  and  in  1537  Blarer  procured  the  abolition  of  images  in  spite  of 
the  opposition  of  Schnepf  and  Brenz,  while  Ulrich  devoted  the  confiscated 
Church  revenues  to  exclusively  secular  purposes.  It  seemed  as  though 
Hesse,  Wiirttemberg,  and  the  Oberland  cities  might  form  a  strong 
Zwinglian  Union  independent  of  the  Lutheran  League  of  Schmalkalden. 
Both  the  Elector  and  the  Landgrave  were  hesitating  whether  to  renew 
that  League,  and  both  were  pursuing  independent  negotiations  at  the 
Court  of  Vienna,  where  Ferdinand  by  his  conciliatory  demeanour  and 
concessions  induced  them  both  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  tlie  persuasions  of 
the  Habsburgs'  foreign  enemies. 

The  necessity  for  this  pacific  diplomacy  on  Ferdinand's  part  was 
amply  demonstrated  by  the  course  of  the  war  with  the  French  and  the 
Turks  from  1536  to  1538.     In  spite  of  the  neutrality  of  Henry  VIII 


1536-8]  League  of  Nurnherg  235 

and  the  Lutheran  Princes  Francis  I  more  than  held  his  own,  and  the  ten 
years'  truce  negotiated  by  Paul  III  at  Nice  in  1538  marked  a  considerable 
recovery  from  the  humiliation  of  1525-9.  The  real  import  of  the  agree- 
ment between  the  two  great  Catholic  Powers,  which  followed  at  Aigues- 
Mortes,  was  and  is  a  matter  of  doubt.  Ostensibly  the  alliance  was  to 
be  directed  against  infidels  and  heretics  ;  and  Henry  VIII,  the  Lutheran 
Princes,  and  the  Turks  had  all  some  ground  for  alarm.  Even  if  war  was 
not  intended  the  Lutherans  dreaded  the  General  Council  which  peace 
brought  perceptibly  nearer.  They  had  brusquely  declined  to  concur  in 
the  assembly  vainly  summoned  by  Paul  to  meet  at  Mantua  in  May,  1537, 
because  the  terms  of  the  summons  implied  that  its  object  was  the  extirpa- 
tion of  Lutherans  and  not  of  abuses.  They  justified  their  refusal  to  the 
Emperor  by  arguing  that  the  proposed  Papal  Council  was  very  different 
from  that  General  Council  contemplated  by  the  Diets  of  1523  and  1524; 
and  the  Elector  John  Frederick  suggested  a  counter  ecumenical  council 
to  be  held  at  Augsburg  under  the  protection  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League. 
One  and  all  they  denied  the  Pope's  authority  to  summon  a  Council  and 
read  with  delight  Henry  VIII's  manifesto  to  that  effect. 

Apart  from  the  General  Council  which  the  union  of  Paul,  Charles, 
and  Francis  seemed  to  portend,  the  Lutherans  had  been  thrown  into 
alarm  by  the  mission  to  Germany  of  the  Emperor's  Vice-Chancellor, 
Held,  who  had  received  his  instructions  in  October,  1536.  Held  had 
been  a  zealous  member  of  the  Reiclishamynergericht^  and  he  was  burning 
to  avenge  the  contumely  with  which  Protestants  had  treated  the  verdicts 
of  that  Court.  He  interpreted  Charles'  cautious  and  somewhat 
ambiguous  language  as  an  order  to  form  a  Catholic  League  with  the 
object  of  restraining,  if  not  of  attacking,  the  Lutheran  Princes.  He 
ignored  the  Treaty  of  Cadan  and  Ferdinand's  later  concessions,  required 
that  the  Protestants  should  promise  submission  to  the  proposed  Council 
and  to  the  Kammergericht^  and,  when  they  refused,  proceeded  to  build  up 
his  Catholic  alliance.  The  Habsburg  rulers,  Ferdinand  and  the  Queen- 
Regent  of  the  Netherlands,  were  alarmed  at  Held's  proceedings ;  but  the 
King  could  not  afford  to  break  with  the  ultra-Catholics  whose  tool  Held 
was ;  and  on  June  10,  1538,  the  League  of  Niiruberg  was  formed  under 
the  nominal  patronage  of  Charles  V.  Its  organisation  was  a  faithful 
copy  of  that  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League,  and  its  members  were  the 
Emperor,  the  King,  the  Archbishops  of  iNIainz  and  Salzburg,  and  the 
Dukes  of  Bavaria,  George  of  Saxony,  and  Eric  and  Henry  of  Brunswick. 
The  League  was  professedly  defensive,  but  its  determination  to  execute 
the  decrees  of  the  Kammergericht,  which  the  Schmalkaldic  League  had 
repudiated,  really  threatened  war  ;  and  the  occasion  for  it  was  almost 
provided  by  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick.  He  was  chafing  at  the  support 
given  by  the  Schmalkaldic  League  to  his  two  towns  of  Brunswick  and 
Goslar,  which  had  been  condemned  by  the  Kammergerieht  to  restore  the 
confiscated  goods  of  the  Church  ;  and  with  a  view  to  consolidating  his 


236  Dangers  in  Hungary  and  Gelders  [i536-9 

territorial  power  he  was  eager  to  carry  out  the  verdict  of  the  Court. 
Personal  animosity  between  him  and  his  neighbour  the  Landgrave  added 
fuel  to  the  flames  ;  Philip  was  believed  to  be  arming  for  war  in  the 
spring  of  1539,  and  Held  and  Duke  Henry  were  bent  upon  anticipating 
his  attack. 

Such  a  development  was,  however,  repugnant  to  responsible  people 
on  both  sides.  The  Emperor  had  not  in  fact  been  so  truculent  as  Held 
represented  ;  his  real  intention  in  sending  hisVice-Chancellor  to  Germany 
seems  to  have  been  to  provide  safeguards  for  his  imperial  authority, 
which  in  1536-7  was  threatened  at  least  as  much  by  Catholic  as  it  was 
by  Protestant  enmities.  The  Pope  appeared  to  be  indifferent  to  the 
fate  of  the  Church  and  Empire  in  Germany,  and  regarded  with  apparent 
unconcern  the  alliance  between  France  and  the  infidels  against  the 
Christian  Emperor.  If  Charles  was  to  make  head  against  them  he  must 
feel  more  secure  in  Germany,  and  the  only  means  feasible  were  a  Council 
summoned  without  the  concurrence  of  Francis  or  Paul,  a  national  synod 
of  the  German  people,  or  a  perpetual  compromise  on  the  basis  of  the 
Niirnberg  peace  of  1532.  The  ten  years'  truce  with  France  concluded  at 
Nice  relieved  Charles  of  his  more  pressing  anxieties,  but  in  spite  of 
appearances,  brought  him  no  nearer  to  the  position  from  which  he  could 
dictate  terms  to  the  Lutherans.  He  was  doubtless  aware  that  Francis 
had  given,  both  before  and  after  the  truce,  satisfactory  assurances  to  the 
German  Princes  to  the  effect  that  the  concord  was  merely  defensive  and 
that  he  would  not  allow  Charles  to  destroy  them.  And  other  dangers 
arose  on  the  imperial  horizon.  In  February,  1538,  Ferdinand  closed  his 
long  rivalry  with  Zapolya  by  a  treaty  which  guaranteed  to  that  potentate, 
who  was  then  childless,  a  lifelong  tenure  of  his  Hungarian  throne  on 
condition  that  Ferdinand  should  be  his  successor.  But  this  only  enraged 
the  really  formidable  foe,  the  Sultan,  who  regarded  Hungary  as  his  and 
Zapolya  as  only  his  viceroy  ;  and  in  1539  war  was  once  more  threatened 
on  the  banks  of  the  Danube. 

A  still  greater  trouble  menaced  the  Habsburgs  in  Flanders,  and  the 
revolt  of  Ghent,  extending  though  it  did  to  Alost,  Oudenaarde,  and 
Courtrai,  was  only  a  part  of  the  peril.  Gelders,  which  had  constantly 
been  to  the  Burgundian  House  what  Scotland  was  to  England,  passed 
in  1539  into  the  hands  of  a  ruler  who  dreamt  of  uniting  with  the 
Schmalkaldic  League  on  the  east,  with  Henry  VIII  on  the  west,  and 
possibly  with  Francis  I  on  the  south,  and  of  thus  surrounding  Charles' 
dominions  in  the  Netherlands  with  an  impenetrable  hostile  fence.  John, 
Duke  of  Cleves,  had  married  Mary,  the  only  child  of  William  of  Jiilich 
and  Berg  ;  hisson  William,  heir  to  the  united  duchy  of  Cleves- Jiilich-Berg, 
had  also  claims  on  the  neighbouring  duchy  of  Gelders,  whose  Duke  died 
without  issue  in  1538.  The  Estates  of  Gelders  admitted  William's 
claims,  and  in  February,  1539,  he  also  succeeded  his  father  in  Cleves. 
He  had  been  educated  by  Erasmus'  friend  Conrad  Heresbach,  and  the 


1539-40]       Changes  in  Bra7idenhurg  and  Saxony  237 

form  of  religion  obtaining  in  Cleves  was  a  curious  Erasmian  compromise 
between  Popery  and  Protestantism,  which  erected  the  Duke  into  a  sort 
of  territorial  Pope  and  bore  some  resemblance  to  the  via  media  pursued 
by  Henry  VIII  in  England  and  by  Joachim  II  in  Brandenburg.  Cleves 
was  thus  a  convenient  political  and  theological  link  between  England 
and  the  Schmalkaldic  League  ;  and  by  means  of  it  Cromwell  in  1539 
thought  of  forging  a  chain  to  bind  the  Emperor.  Duke  William's 
sister  Sibylla  was  already  married  to  the  Elector  Frederick  of  Saxony, 
and  at  the  end  of  1539  another  sister  Anne  was  wedded  to  Henry  VIII. 

Over  and  above  these  foreign  complications  the  ever-increasing 
strength  of  the  Lutheran  party  in  Germany  rendered  an  attack  upon 
them  a  foolhardy  enterprise  on  the  Emperor's  part  unless  his  hands 
were  completely  free  in  other  directions.  In  1539  two  of  the  chief 
pillars  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  Empire  were  removed,  the  Elector 
of  Brandenburg  and  Duke  George  of  Saxony.  Joachim  I  of  Brandenburg 
had  died  in  1535,  but  it  was  four  years  later  before  his  son  and  successor 
definitely  seceded  from  the  ancient  Church.  On  his  accession  he  joined 
the  Catholic  League  of  Halle  and  retained  the  old  Church  ritual,  but 
in  1538  he  refused  adherence  to  the  extended  Catholic  confederation  of 
Niirnberg.  In  February,  1539,  his  capital  Berlin  with  KoUn  demanded 
the  administration  of  the  Sacrament  in  both  kinds,  and  the  Bishop  of 
Brandenburg  himself  advocated  a  Reformation.  Joachim  II,  however, 
taking  Henry  VIII  as  his  exemplar,  resolved  to  be  as  independent  of 
Wittenberg  as  he  was  of  Rome  ;  and  probably  the  chief  motive  in  his 
Reformation  was  the  facility  it  afforded  him  of  self-aggrandisement  by 
appropriating  the  wealth  of  the  monasteries  and  establishing  an  absolute 
control  over  his  Bishops.  He  became,  in  fact,  though  not  in  title, 
summus  episcopus  and  supreme  head  of  the  Church  within  his  dominions. 
Like  the  Tudor  King  he  was  fond  of  splendour  and  ritual,  made  few 
changes  in  Catholic  use,  and  maintained  an  intermediate  attitude 
between  the  two  great  religious  parties. 

The  revolution  in  Albertine  Saxony  was  more  complete.  Duke 
George,  one  of  the  most  estimable  Princes  of  his  age,  had  kept  intact 
his  faith  in  Catholic  dogma,  though  he  had  spoken  with  candour  of  the 
necessity  for  practical  reforms.  On  his  death  in  1589  the  Duchy  passed 
to  his  brother  Henry,  who  had  preferred  the  religion  of  his  Ernestine 
cousin  the  Elector  to  that  of  his  brother  the  Duke.  In  order  to  avert 
the  impending  conversion  of  his  duchy,  George  had  made  his  brother's 
succession  conditional  upon  his  renouncing  Lutheranism  and  joining  the 
League  of  Niirnberg  ;  if  he  rejected  these  terms  the  duchy  was  to  pass  to 
the  Emperor  or  to  Ferdinand.  For  this  violent  expedient  there  was 
no  legal  justification  and  no  practical  support  within  or  without  the 
duchy.  The  people  had  long  resented  the  repressive  measures  with 
which  Duke  George  had  been  compelled  to  support  Catholicism,  and 
they  accepted  with  little  demur  the  new  Duke  and  the  new  religion. 


238  Negotiations  with  the  Protestants  [i539-40 

One  Bishop,  John  of  Meissen,  petitioned  Charles  to  be  freed  from  his 
allegiance  to  the  Duke  ;  but  even  the  Catholic  members  of  the  Estates 
repudiated  his  action,  and  in  1540  the  Estates  sanctioned  the  Lutheran 
Reformation  which  Duke  Henry  had  begun  without  their  concurrence. 

Besides  the  Elector  of  Brandenburg  and  the  Duke  of  Saxony,  minor 
Princes  and  many  towns  threw  in  their  lot  with  the  Protestant  cause. 
Joachim  IPs  brother.  Margrave  John  of  Brandenburg,  who  ruled  in 
Cottbus  and  Peitz,  joined  the  Schmalkaldic  League  in  1537.  Ratisbon, 
long  a  Catholic  stronghold,  relinquished  its  ancient  faith  ;  its  monas- 
teries had  only  one  or  two  inmates  apiece  ;  and  only  some  twenty 
people  gathered  to  worship  in  its  cathedral.  In  other  Catholic  States 
there  were  said  to  be  more  monasteries  than  monks,  and  the  number  of 
candidates  for  ordination  sank  to  five  in  four  years  in  the  see  of  Passau, 
and  to  seventeen  in  eight  years  in  that  of  Laibach.  Heidelberg,  the 
Elector  Palatine's  capital,  was  described  as  the  most  Lutheran  city 
in  Germany  ;  and  the  Elector  himself  was,  in  the  few  moments  he  spared 
from  the  hunt  and  his  cups,  wavering  between  Luther  and  the  Pope. 
Albrecht  of  Brandenburg,  Luther's  "  devil  of  Mainz,"  was  the  only  member 
of  his  family  who  remained  Catholic,  and  he  was  compelled  to  flee  from 
his  palace  at  Halle.  Mecklenburg-Schwerin  was  reformed  by  its 
episcopal  Duke,  and  Brunswick-Calenberg  by  its  Dowager-Duchess, 
Elizabeth  of  Brandenburg. 

So  the  golden  opportunity  which  the  alliance  with  Paul  and  Francis 
at  Nice  appeared  to  afford  to  Charles  for  the  reduction  of  German  heresy 
passed  awa}'-  through  no  fault  of  the  Emperor's.  The  zealous  Held  was 
suppressed  ;  the  negotiations  with  the  Lutherans  were  entrusted  to  the 
moderate  Archbishop  of  Lund,  who  had  contrived  the  agreement 
between  Zapolya  and  Ferdinand  ;  and  Charles  accepted  the  mediation  of 
the  doubtful  Catholic,  the  Elector  Palatine  Ludwig  V,  and  the  doubtful 
Protestant,  Joachim  H  of  Brandenburg.  The  parties  met  at  Frankfort 
in  April,  1539.  Henry  VHI  sent  envoys  to  stiffen  the  Lutheran  demands 
and  prevent  an  agreement  if  possible.  The  Protestant  terms  were  high; 
they  wanted  a  permanent  peace  which  no  Council  and  no  assembly  of 
Estates  should  have  the  power  to  break  ;  the  Niirnberg  League  was  to 
receive  no  fresh  accessions,  its  Protestant  rival  of  Schmalkalden  as  many 
as  chose  to  join  it  ;  and  all  processes  in  the  Reichskamme7'gericJit  were  to 
be  suspended  for  eighteen  months.  All  that  Charles  ultimately  conceded 
was  a  suspension  for  six  months,  and  he  quietly  gave  his  consent  to 
the  Niirnberg  League.  But  its  immediate  object  of  enforcing  the 
decrees  of  the  Supreme  Court  was  baulked  ;  and  for  half  a  year  even 
the  latest  recruits  to  Protestantism  were  to  enjoy  complete  immunity. 
Beyond  that  nothing  was  settled,  and  the  peace  of  the  Lutherans 
depended  upon  the  extent  of  the  Emperor's  troubles  in  other  directions. 

At  first  tlie  Emperor  prospered.  Ghent  was  crushed  with  ease  in 
February,  1540.     As  soon  as  Henry  VIII  realised  that  the  Catholic 


1540-1]  Catholic  hostility  to  Charles  239 

alliance  of  France,  the  Pope,  and  the  Emperor,  involved  no  attack  upon 
him,  he  repudiated  his  Low  German  connexions  and  his  plain  wife  from 
Cleves,  and  Charles'  ministers  marvelled  at  the  ways  of  Providence. 
They  succeeded  also  in  keeping  Philip  of  Hesse  in  good  humour  and  in 
preventing  Duke  William's  admission  into  the  Schmalkaldic  League. 
The  clear-sighted  Bucer  deplored  the  Emperor's  good  fortune,  and 
augured  the  same  treatment  for  Protestant  Germany  which  Cliarles  had 
meted  out  to  Ghent.  But  the  hour  was  not  yet  come.  In  July,  1540, 
Francis  I  rejected  the  Emperor's  conditions  for  the  settlement  of  their 
disputes,  betrothed  his  niece,  Jeanne  of  Navarre,  to  Duke  William  of 
Cleves,  and  refused  to  surrender  his  claims  on  Milan  and  Savoy,  or  to 
join  in  action  against  Turk  or  heretic.  Parties  in  Germany  were  more 
confounded  than  ever.  The  spread  of  Lutheranism  produced  no  union 
in  the  Catholic  ranks,  and  at  Frankfort  Catholics  as  well  as  Lutherans 
had  refused  to  serve  against  the  Turks.  Charles  appears  to  have  reached 
the  not  unreasonable  conclusion  that  Catholicism,  especially  in  the 
ecclesiastical  principalities,  would  only  be  safe  under  the  shadow  of 
his  territorial  power.  The  Electors  of  Trier,  Cologne,  and  Mainz,  and 
other  great  Bishops,  were  ever  being  tempted  to  follow  the  example  of 
Albrecht  of  Prussia  and  turn  the  lands  of  their  sees  into  secular  hereditary 
fiefs.  Bucer  had  suggested  this  measure  as  necessary  for  the  firm  founda- 
tion of  Protestantism,  and  the  Elector  of  Cologne  was  beginning  to 
waver.  But  these  non-heritable  ecclesiastical  fiefs  were  the  chief  bulwark 
of  Habsburg  imperialism  against  the  encroaching  territorial  tide  ;  and  it 
was  natural  that  Charles  should  dream  of  extending  his  influence  from 
Burgundy  over  Cologne,  Miinster,  Bremen,  and  Osnabriick,  so  that  if 
they  were  to  be  secularised  at  all,  he  might  do  the  work  and  deal 
with  them  as  he  had  dealt  with  Utrecht.  This,  of  course,  was  not 
the  view  of  the  ecclesiastical  Princes,  who  wished  at  least  to  clioose 
between  the  advantages  of  their  independent  spiritual  rule  and  those 
of  an  equally  independent  territorial  authority  ;  and  there  was  actually 
talk  of  an  alliance  between  them,  backed  by  the  Bavarian  Dukes,  and 
the  Schmalkaldic  League,  for  the  defence  of  national  freedom  against 
the  Habsburgs.  Yet  at  the  same  time  ultra-Catholics  were  denouncing 
Charles  for  his  concessions  at  Frankfort.  The  Pope  censured  the  Regent 
Maria  and  the  Archbishop  of  Lund,  and  required  the  Emperor  to  annul 
the  agreement  with  the  Protestants  on  pain  of  being  pronounced  schis- 
matic ;  while  Cardinal  Pole  hinted  that  the  Church  had  more  to  fear 
from  Charles  V  than  it  had  from  Henry  VHL 

For  a  while  the  Emperor  had  to  tread  delicately,  and  he  took  refuge 
in  a  series  of  religious  conferences.  The  first  was  held  at  Hagenau  in 
June,  1540,  but  produced  no  result.  Another  met  at  Worms  in 
November  ;  there  were  present  eleven  Catholics  and  eleven  Protestants, 
but  the  former  included  Ludwig  of  the  Palatinate,  Joachim  of  Branden- 
burg, and  William  of  Cleves,  whose  Catholicism  was  not  of  the  Roman 


2-10  Failure  of  the  Ratishon  Conference  [i54i 

type.  For  once  the  Protestants  were  united,  the  Catholics  divided,  and 
Granvelle,  Avho  represented  the  Emperor,  was  an  astute  politician. 
Morone,  the  papal  Nuncio,  was  reduced  to  attempts  to  create  Protestant 
dissensions  over  the  Eucharist,  and  to  gain  time  by  substituting  an 
interchange  of  writings  for  oral  debate.  The  discussions  began  on 
January  14, 1541,  between  Eck  and  Melanchthon,  but  the  meeting  was 
soon  adjourned  to  the  Diet  at  Ratisbon,  where  Charles  would  attend 
in  person.  It  opened  on  April  5,  and  during  its  course  the  two  parties 
made  their  nearest  approach  to  unity.  The  Reforming  movement  in  Italy 
had  somewhat  modified  the  Catholic  view  of  justification,  and  Morone's 
place  was  taken  by  the  broad-minded  Contarini  ;  while  on  the  other 
side  Bucer  had  drawn  up  an  alluring  scheme  of  comprehension.  He, 
Melanchthon,  and  Pistorius  represented  the  Protestants ;  Eck,  Pflug,  and 
Cropper  the  Catholics.  Of  the  latter  Eck  was  the  only  fighting  divine, 
and  both  the  marriage  of  priests  and  the  use  of  the  cup  were  conceded, 
while  an  agreement  was  reached  on  the  doctrine  of  justification. 

Yet  the  most  pertinent  comment  on  Bucer's  scheme  was  Melanch- 
thon's,  who  compared  it  to  Plato's  Republic.  He  and  Luther  and  John 
Frederick  on  one  side,  and  Aleander  and  the  Roman  theologians  on  the 
other,  were  convinced  that  no  concord  was  possible  between  Rome  and 
evangelical  Germany.  It  has  been  found  possible  to  elaborate  formu- 
laries which  will  bear  both  a  Catholic  and  a  Protestant  interpretation, 
but  it  requires  a  strong  hand  and  an  effective  government  to  compel 
their  acceptance  ;  Charles  could  not  coerce  either  Wittenberg  or  Rome  ; 
he  had  neither  the  will  nor  the  means  of  Henry  VIII  and  Elizabeth. 
Bavaria  organised  an  extreme  faction  among  the  Bishops  and  non- 
Electoral  Princes,  who  revealed  their  double  motives  by  threatening  to 
seek  another  Emperor  unless  Charles  afforded  them  better  protection 
and  obtained  restitution  of  their  secularised  lands.  This  intrigue  proved 
fatal  to  the  attempt  at  comprehension  and  the  result  of  the  Diet  was  to 
leave  parties  in  much  the  same  state  as  before.  In  July,  1541,  Charles 
made  a  declaration  to  the  Protestants,  suggested  by  Brandenburg,  that 
the  Augsburg  Confession  should  be  no  ground  for  proceeding  against 
any  Prince  ;  that  the  Reichskammergericht  should  not  exclude  questions 
of  ecclesiastical  property  from  this  guarantee;  and  that,  although  for  the 
future  monasteries  must  not  be  dissolved,  they  might  adopt  a  "  Christian 
reformation."  But  this  declaration  was  to  remain  secret,  and  at  the 
same  time  Charles  renewed  the  Catholic  League  of  Niirnberg.  He  was 
forced  to  ignore  both  Protestant  and  Catholic  disobedience  and  to 
conciliate  rebels  in  both  the  camps. 

If  this  was  a  defeat  for  the  Emperor,  he  found  compensation  else- 
where, and  skilfully  turned  to  his  own  advantage  the  most  discreditable 
episode  in  the  history  of  German  Protestantism.  Philip  of  Hesse,  like 
most  of  the  Princes  and  many  of  the  Prelates  of  his  age,  was  a 
debauchee  ;  but  with  his  moral  laxity  he  combined,  like  Henry  VIII, 


1540-1]    Philip  of  Hesse  makes  terms  with  Charles  V    241 

some  curious  scruples  of  conscience,  and  he  could  not  bring  himself  to 
take  the  sacrament  while  he  was  unfaithful  to  his  wife.  Insuperable 
antipathy  prevented  marital  relations ;  continence  was  out  of  the  ques- 
tion ;  debauchery  endangered  his  soul.  He  put  his  hard  case  before  the 
heads  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  They  disbelieved  in  divorce  ;  so  did 
Henry  VHI,  but  they  did  not  possess  Henry's  talent  for  discovering 
proofs  that  he  had  never  been  married  to  the  wife  he  wished  to  repudiate  ; 
and  bigamy,  from  which  the  Tudor  abstained,  apj)eared  the  only 
solution.  The  same  idea  had  occurred  before  to  Clement  VII ;  a  previous 
Pope  had  licensed  bigamy  in  the  case  of  Henry  IV  of  Castile  ;  and  the 
Old  Testament  precedents  were  familiar  to  all.  Luther,  Melanchthon, 
and  Bucer  all  concurred  in  approving  Philip's  second  marriage  on  con- 
dition that  it  remained  a  secret.  The  ceremou}^  took  place  at  Rothen- 
burg  on  March  4,  1540,  and  the  news  soon  leaked  out.  Melanchthon 
quailed  before  the  public  odium  and  nearly  died  of  shame,  but  Luther 
wished  to  brazen  the  matter  out  with  a  lie.  "  The  secret  '  yea,'  "  he 
wrote,  "must  for  the  sake  of  Christ's  Church  remain  a  public  '  nay.' " 
By  denying  the  truth  of  the  rumours  he  would,  he  argued,  be  doing  no 
more  than  Christ  Himself  did  when  He  said  He  knew  not  the  day  and 
the  hour  of  His  second  coming,  and  he  also  alleged  the  analogy  of  the 
confessional  ;  a  good  confessor  must  deny  in  Court  all  knowledge  of 
what  he  has  learnt  in  confession. 

The  moral  effect  of  this  revelation  upon  the  Lutheran  cause  was 
incalculable.  Cranmer  wrote  from  England  to  his  uncle-in-law  Osiander 
of  the  pain  which  it  caused  to  the  friends  of  the  Reformation  and  the 
handle  it  gave  to  the  enemy.  Ferdinand  avowed  that  he  had  long  been 
inclined  to  evangelical  doctrines,  but  that  this  affair  had  produced  a 
revulsion  of  feeling.  John  Frederick  and  Ulrich  of  Wurttemberg 
refused  to  guarantee  Philip  immunity  for  his  crime,  the  legal  penalty 
for  which  was  death  ;  and  the  Landgrave,  seriously  alarmed,  sought  to 
make  his  peace  with  the  Habsburgs,  and  possibly  with  Rome ;  as  a  last 
resort  he  felt  he  could  obtain  a  dispensation  from  the  Pope,  who  would 
willingly  pay  the  price  for  a  prodigal  son.  In  the  autumn  of  1540  he 
began  his  negotiations  with  Granvelle,  and  on  June  13, 1541,  concluded 
his  bargain  with  Charles ;  he  abandoned  his  relations  with  England, 
France,  and  Cleves,  undertook  to  exclude  them  all  from  the  Schmalkaldic 
League,  to  side  with  Charles  on  all  political  questions,  and  to  recognise 
Ferdinand  as  Charles'  successor  in  the  Empire.  In  return  he  only 
obtained  security  against  personal  attacks  ;  he  would  not  be  exempt 
from  the  consequences  of  a  general  v/ar  against  Protestants.  Philip's 
son-in-law,  Maurice,  who  succeeded  his  father  Henry  as  Duke  of  Albertine 
Saxony  in  that  year,  was  included  in  the  arrangement  ;  and  Joachim  of 
Brandenburg  was  induced  to  promise  help  against  Cleves  in  return  for 
the  confirmation  of  his  church  establishment.  As  the  Elector  John 
Frederick  could  not  be  induced  to  abandon  his  brother-in-law  of  Cleves, 


C.    M.    H.    II. 


242  League  against  Charles  V  [i540-2 

the  Sclmialkaldic  League  was  split  into  two  parties  pledged  to  take 
opposite  sides  in  that  all-important  question  ;  and  the  anger  of  German 
historians  at  this  "  treason  "  of  Philip  of  Hesse  is  due  not  merely  to  its 
disastrous  effect  on  Protestantism,  but  to  the  fact  that  it  materially 
contributed  to  the  conquest  of  Gelders  by  Charles  and  to  its  eventual 
separation  from  the  Empire.  But  for  Philip  of  Hesse's  bigamy  Gelders 
might  to-day  be  part  of  Germany  and  not  of  Holland. 

The  pressure  of  other  dangers,  however,  gave  Gelders  a  two  years' 
respite.  The  Emperor  hurried  from  the  Diet  of  Ratisbon  to  attempt 
the  conquest  of  Algiers,  a  nest  of  pirates  which  was  a  perpetual  menace 
to  his  Spanish  and  Italian  possessions  ;  and  the  disastrous  failure  of  that 
expedition  encouraged  Francis  I  and  Solyman  to  renew  their  war  on 
the  Habsburgs.  Zapolya  had  died  on  July  23,  1540,  but  before  his 
death  he  had  been  unexpectedly  blessed  Avith  a  son,  John  Sigismund. 
His  widow  and  her  minister  George  Martinuzzi,  Bishop  of  Grosswardein, 
thereupon  repudiated  the  treaty  of  Grosswardein  (1538),  by  which  Ferdi- 
nand was  to  succeed  Zapolya,  and  crowned  the  infant  John  Sigismund. 
Their  only  hope  lay  in  Solyman,  and  the  Turk  had  determined  to  end 
the  nominal  independence  which  Hungary  enjoyed  under  Zapolya.  In 
August,  1541,  he  captured  Buda,  turned  its  church  of  St.  Mary  into  a 
mosque,  and  Hungar}^  into  a  Turkish  province.  The  Diet  of  Speier 
(January,  1542)  offered  substantial  levies  for  the  war,  but  they  were 
ill-equipped  and  worse  commanded  by  Joachim  of  Brandenburg.  In 
September  the  army  sat  down  before  Pesth  ;  on  the  5th  a  breach  was 
made,  but  the  storming  party  failed  ;  and  afterwards,  wrote  Sir  Thomas 
Seymour,  who  was  present,  "  the  soldiers  for  lack  of  wages  refused  to 
keep  watch  and  ward  or  to  make  assault."  Two  days  later  the  siege  was 
raised  ;  Joachim  and  his  troops  returned  in  disgrace  to  Germany  ;  and 
next  year  Solyman  extended  his  sway  over  Fiinfkirchen,  Stuhlweissen- 
burg,  and  Gran. 

Misfortune  attended  the  Emperor  in  the  west  as  well  as  in  the  east. 
Cleves  had  definitely  thrown  in  its  lot  with  France,  and  the  anti-imperial 
league  was  joined  by  Sweden,  Denmark,  and  Scotland.  The  French 
alliance  with  Turkey  was  once  more  brought  into  play,  the  Pope  was 
hostile  to  both  the  Habsburg  brothers,  and  Henry  VIII  was  still 
haggling  over  the  price  of  his  friendship.  Francis  I  declared  war  in 
1542;  and,  although  he  failed  before  Perpignan,  a  Danish-Clevish 
army  under  Martin  van  Rossem  defeated  the  imperialists  at  Sittard 
(March  24,  1543),  Luxemburg  was  overrun,  and  a  Franco-Turkish  fleet 
captured  Nice. 

The  Lutheran  Princes  meanwhile  were  making  the  best  of  their 
opportunities.  In  1541  the  Erasmian  Pflug  was  elected  Bishop  of 
Naumburg,  but  John  Frederick  feared  he  would  join  the  Niirnberg 
League  ;  and  in  spite  of  Luther's  warnings  against  the  violence  of  his 
action  he  forced  Amsdorf  into  the  see.     Pflug's  cause  was  adopted  by 


1542]  Attack  upon  Brunswick  243 

some  of  the  nobles  of  Meissen,  a  part  of  Saxony  which  was  mainly 
Albei'tine  but  to  some  extent  under  Ernestine  influence.  The  Catholic 
Bishop  of  Meissen  naturally  sided  with  Maurice,  who  had  succeeded 
to  his  father  in  1541,  rather  than  with  John  Frederick.  In  1542 
he  demurred  to  the  Elector's  demand  for  levies  for  the  Turkish  war, 
and  John  Frederick  without  consulting  his  cousin  marched  his  troops 
into  Wurzen,  the  property  of  a  collegiate  chapter  founded  by  the 
Bishops  of  Meissen,  and  conveniently  situated  for  incorporation  in  the 
Elector's  dominions.  This  inflamed  the  Albertine  nobility,  and  Maurice 
began  to  arm.  The  Landgrave  and  Luther  intervened  ;  a  compromise 
was  patched  up,  and  Wurzen  was  partitioned  ;  but  a  root  of  bitterness 
remained  between  the  cousins,  which  bore  fruit  in  later  years. 

One  aggression  was  promptly  followed  by  another.  Among  the  tem- 
poral Catholic  Princes  none  of  note  were  left  except  the  Dukes  of  Bavaria 
and  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick.  Duke  Henry  (Luther's  "  hosier  Heinz ") 
was  described  as  the  "greatest  Papist  in  all  Germany,"  and  he  was  left 
alone  in  the  north  to  face  the  Schmalkaldic  League.  He  had  long  been 
at  enmity  with  Philip  of  Hesse,  and  his  cruelty  towards  his  wife  was 
almost  as  great  a  scandal  as  the  Landgrave's  bigamy.  In  his  zeal  for 
his  faith  or  for  his  house  he  pronounced  Charles'  suspension  of  the 
verdicts  of  the  Reichskammergericht  against  Brunswick  and  Goslar  tO' 
be  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  Empire,  and  despite  the  disapprobation 
of  Ferdinand,  Granvelle,  and  Albrecht  of  Mainz,  he  proceeded  to  attack 
the  two  towns.  The  Schmalkaldic  League  at  once  armed  in  their  defence  ;: 
but  not  satisfied  with  this  the  Elector  and  the  Landgrave  overran  Henry's 
duchy,  Wolfenbiittel  alone  offering  serious  resistance  (August,  1542). 
The  Duke's  territories  were  sequestered  by  the  League  and  evangelised 
by  Bugenhagen.  Ferdinand  had  to  content  himself  with  the  League's 
assurance  that  it  would  carry  the  war  no  farther,  and  with  the  pretence 
that  it  had  been  waged  in  defence  of  Charles'  suspending  powers.  But 
the  sort  of  respect  the  Lutherans  were  willing  to  pay  the  imperial 
authorities  was  shown  by  their  attitude  towards  the  Kamviergericht. 
They  obtained  admittance  to  it  early  in  1542,  and  thereupon  declined  to 
tolerate  the  presence  of  any  clerical  colleagues ;  but,  failing  to  secure 
a  majority  on  it,  they  declared  in  December  that  it  had  no  jurisdiction 
over  them  or  their  allies.  Encouraged  perhaps  by  the  result  of  the 
Brunswick  war,  Duke  William  of  Cleves  now  abandoned  his  Erasmian 
compromise  and  adopted  Lutheranism  undefiled.  Even  more  important 
was  the  simultaneous  conversion  of  Hermann  von  Wied,  Archbishop 
and  Elector  of  Cologne,  whose  territories  were  surrounded  on  all  sides  by 
the  composite  duchy  of  Cleves-Jiilich-Berg.  Bishop  Hermann  had  held 
the  see  since  1515 ;  he  had  corresponded  with  Erasmus,  and  after  1536 
had  endeavoured  to  reform  the  worst  practical  abuses  in  his  diocese. 
Gropper's  treatise,  written  to  reconcile  justification  by  faith  with  Catholic 
doctrine,  probably  indicates  the  direction  in  which  the  Archbishop's  mind 


244  Annexation  of  Gelders  [i543 

was  moving.  He  next  began  to  correspond  with  Bucer,  who  with  his 
connivance  commenced  preaching  at  Bonn  in  1542.  Bucer  was  followed 
by  Melanchthon,  who  completed  the  work  of  conversion.  Franz  von 
Waldeck,  Bishop  of  Miinster,  Minden,  and  Osnabriick,  was  inclined  to 
follow  his  metropolitan's  lead,  and  another  important  convert  was  Count 
Otto  Henry,  nephew,  and  eventually  successor,  of  the  Elector  Palatine. 

The  Emperor's  fate  trembled  in  the  balance.  Arrayed  against  him 
were  France,  Turkey,  the  Pope,  Sweden,  Denmark,  Scotland,  Gelders, 
and  Cleves  ;  he  could  only  look  for  assistance  from  Henry  VHI  and  the 
Lutherans.  Henry  became  his  ally  in  hope  of  reducing  Scotland,  but 
into  which  scale  would  the  German  sword  be  cast?  Francis  I  was 
holding  out  all  sorts  of  inducements,  and  his  proposals  were  backed  by 
Strassburg  and  Calvin.  But  the  Princes  were  perhaps  not  bold  enough, 
perhaps  not  bad  enough,  to  seize  the  opportunity  of  effecting  their 
sovereign's  ruin.  Francis  was  allied  to  both  Turks  and  Pope  ;  Charles 
was  for  once  maintaining  the  national  cause.  To  motives  of  patriotism 
was  added  the  private  agreement  between  Charles  and  the  Landgrave. 
The  Ha^sburgs  were  lavishing  all  their  wiles  on  Philip ;  and  Philip,  in 
spite  of  Bucer's  warnings  and  in  spite  of  his  own  real  convictions,  allowed 
himself  to  be  duped.  He  opposed  the  admission  of  Denmark,  Sweden, 
and  Cleves  into  the  Schmalkaldic  League,  and  Duke  William  was  thus 
left  to  his  fate.  With  genuine  insight  Charles  made  the  reduction  of 
Gelders  his  first  object.  On  August  22,  1543,  he  arrived  before  Duren, 
the  principal  stronghold  in  Gelders ;  on  the  24th  it  was  battered  from 
break  of  day  till  2  p.m.,  and  then  his  Spanish  and  Italian  troops  took  it 
by  storm.  Jiilich,  Roermonde,  and  Orkelen  fell  in  the  next  few  days, 
and  on  September  6  Duke  William  knelt  before  Charles  at  Venloo. 
Gelders  and  Zutphen  were  annexed  to  the  Emperor's  hereditary  States, 
passed  from  him  to  Philip  11,  and  thus  were  in  effect  severed  from  the 
Empire  ;  Duke  William  repudiated  his  French  bride  and  his  heresy,  and 
later  (1546)  was  married  to  Maria,  Ferdinand's  daughter.  The  Refor- 
mation in  neighbouring  Cologne  was  checked,  and  during  the  winter 
Bucer  declared  that  the  subjection  of  Germany  was  inevitable  and 
imminent. 

Such  was  not  the  view  taken  by  German  Princes.  Charles  still 
needed  their  help  to  deal  with  France  and  the  Turks,  and  they  allowed 
themselves  to  be  bought.  Their  price  was  heavy,  but  the  Emperor  was 
willing  to  pay  it,  knowing  that  if  he  succeeded  he  would  get  his  money 
back  with  plenty  of  interest.  At  the  Diet  of  Speier  in  February,  1544, 
his  words  were  smooth  and  his  promises  ample.  In  fact  he  almost 
abandoned  the  Catholic  position  by  committing  himself  to  the  pledge 
of  a  national  settlement  of  the  religious  question  whether  the  Pope  liked 
it  or  not,  and  by  confirming  the  suspension  of  all  processes  against  the 
Protestants  and  their  possession  of  the  goods  of  the  Church.  In  return 
the  Lutheran  Princes  contributed  some  meagre  levies  for  the  French 


1544]  Peace  of  Crepy  245 

and  Turkish  wars.  Their  real  concession  was  abstention  from  taking  part 
with  the  Emperor's  enemies,  while  Charles  and  Henry  VIII  invaded  the 
French  King's  dominions.  This  time  it  was  John  Frederick  who  made 
private  terms  with  the  Habsburgs  without  his  colleagues'  knowledge. 
In  return  for  an  imperial  guarantee  of  the  Cleves  succession  to  his  wife, 
the  sister  of  Duke  William,  in  case  William's  line  died  out,  the  Elector 
of  Saxony  recognised  Ferdinand  as  Roman  King  ;  and  the  compact  was  to 
be  sealed  by  the  marriage  of  John  Frederick's  son  to  one  of  Ferdinand's 
daughters.  Other  members  of  the  hostile  coalition  were  detached  by 
the  same  skilful  play  upon  particularist  interests.  Gustavus  of  Sweden 
and  Frederick  of  Denmark  had  joined  it  from  fear  lest  Charles  should 
enforce  the  claims  of  his  niece  Dorothea  (daughter  of  Christian  II  and 
Isabella),  and  her  husband.  Count  Frederick  of  the  Palatinate,  to  both 
those  kingdoms.  These  were  now  abandoned  and  Francis  I  was  left 
without  allies  except  the  Pope  and  the  Sultan. 

The  campaign  opened  in  1544  with  a  French  victory  at  Ceresole,  but 
the  tables  were  turned  in  the  north.  Aided  by  Lutheran  troops  Charles 
captured  St  Dizier  while  Henry  VIII  laid  siege  to  Boulogne.  In 
September  the  Emperor  was  almost  within  sight  of  the  walls  of  Paris,, 
when  suddenly  on  the  18tli  he  signed  the  preliminaries  of  the  Peace  of 
Crepy.  Many  and  ingenious  were  the  reasons  alleged  before  the  world 
and  to  his  ally  of  England.  In  reality  there  had  been  a  race  between 
the  two  as  to  which  should  make  peace  first  and  leave  the  other  in  the 
grip  of  the  enemy.  Had  Henry  won  he  might  have  conquered  Scotland^ 
and  there  might  have  been  no  Schmalkaldic  war.  But  Charles  had 
proved  the  nimbler  ;  it  was  he  and  not  Henry  who  was  left  free  to 
deliver  his  blows  in  another  direction.  At  the  cost  of  liberal  terms  to 
his  foe  he  had  duped  one  of  the  allies  who  had  helped  him  to  victory  ; 
it  remains  to  recount  the  fate  which  befell  the  other. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

EELIGIOUS  WAR  IN  GERMANY 

Charles  V  achieved  a  masterpiece  of  unscrupulous  statecraft  when 
he  extricated  himself  from  his  war  with  France  and  left  his  English  ally 
entangled  in  its  toils.  Cogent  military  reasons  for  the  peace  concluded 
at  Crepy  could  doubtless  be  alleged  ;  the  position  of  the  imperial  army 
in  the  heart  of  France  was  more  imposing  than  secure,  and  the  disasters 
of  the  retreat  from  Marseilles  in  152-4  might  have  been  repeated  in 
Champagne  or  Picardy.  But  there  were  deeper  motives  at  work  ;  how- 
ever promising  the  military  situation  might  have  been,  no  prosecution 
of  the  war  could  have  been  attended  with  greater  advantages  than  was 
its  conclusion  at  that  juncture.  Charles  was  left  with  a  freer  hand  to 
deal  with  Germany  than  he  had  ever  had  before.  He  had  been  more 
brilliantly  victorious  in  1530,  but  England  and  France  were  then  at 
peace,  and  at  liberty  to  harass  him  with  underhand  intrigues.  Now, 
they  were  anxious  suitors  for  his  favour,  ready,  instead  of  reluctant,  to 
purchase  his  support  against  each  other  by  furthering  the  Emperor's 
efforts  to  cope  with  his  remaining  difficulties.  These  were  now  three, 
Turkish,  Lutheran,  and  papal  ;  with  the  two  latter  he  must  deal  to 
some  extent  simultaneously  ;  the  Turkish  problem  he  was  enabled  by 
the  friendly  offices  of  Francis  I  to  postpone. 

Few  historical  points  are  so  hard  to  determine  as  Charles'  real 
intentions  with  respect  to  the  religious  situation  in  Germany  in  1545. 
Was  it  to  be  peace  or  was  it  to  be  war  ?  We  have  much  of  the 
Emperor's  correspondence  to  guide  us,  but  its  help  is  by  no  means 
decisive.  Charles  was  constitutionally  hesitating  ;  it  was  his  habit  to 
dally  with  rival  schemes  until  circumstances  compelled  a  choice.  On 
the  eve  of  war  he  was  still  weighing  the  merits  of  peace,  and  it  was 
always  possible  that  an  unexpected  development  in  any  one  of  his 
heterogeneous  realms  might  disturb  all  past  calculations.  Yet  there 
can  be  little  doubt  as  to  Charles'  ultimate  aim  in  1545  or  at  any  other 
date.  The  original  dynastic  objects  of  his  policy  had  been  achieved 
with  wonderful  success,  and  the  subordinate  but  still  powerful  motive 
of  religion  came  more  prominently  into  action.     His   religious  ideas 

246 


1526-45]  Religious  policy  of  Charles  V  247 

were  comparatively  simple  ;  he  adhered  to  medieval  Catholicism  because 
he  could  comprehend  no  other  creed  and  conceive  of  no  other  form  of 
ecclesiastical  polity.  As  well  let  there  be  two  Emperors  as  two  inde- 
pendent standards  of  faith.  The  Church  like  the  Empire  must  be 
one  and  indivisible,  and  he  must  be  the  sovereign  of  the  one  and  the 
protector  of  the  other. 

With  these  ideas  it  was  impossible  for  Charles  even  to  contemplate 
a  permanent  toleration  of  schism  or  heresy.  His  concessions  to  the 
Lutherans  from  1526  to  1544  were  not  made  with  any  such  intention  ; 
they  were  simply  payments  extorted  from  Charles  by  necessity  for 
indispensable  services  to  be  rendered  against  the  Turks  and  the  French  ; 
they  were  all  provisional  and  were  limited  in  time  to  the  meeting  of 
a  General  Council.  That  they  sprang  from  necessity  and  not  from  any 
reluctance  of  Charles  to  persecute  is  proved  by  his  conduct  in  other 
lands  than  Germany.  He  did  not  attempt  a  policy  of  toleralion  or 
comprehension  in  Spain  or  in  the  Netherlands  ;  there  his  methods  were 
the  Inquisition  and  the  stake.  Wherever  he  had  the  power  to  persecute 
he  persecuted  ;  he  abstained  in  Germany  only  because  he  had  no  other 
choice  and  because  he  thought  his  abstention  was  not  for  ever  ;  and  in 
the  end  the  most  powerful  motive  for  his  abdication  was  his  desire  to 
escape  the  necessity  of  countenancing  permanent  schism. 

Throughout,  Charles  was  steadfast  to  the  idea  of  Catholic  unity  ;  but 
his  determination  to  enforce  it  at  the  cost  of  war  was  the  growth  of 
time  and  the  result  of  the  gradual  course  of  events.  He  is  credited  with 
a  desire  to  effect  his  end  by  the  method  of  comprehension  ;  but  room  for 
the  Lutherans  in  the  Catholic  Church  was  to  be  found  not  so  much  by 
widening  the  portals  of  the  Church  as  by  narrowing  Lutheran  doctrine, 
by  the  partial  submission  of  the  Lutherans  and  not  by  the  surrender  of 
current  Catholicism.  It  soon  became  obvious  that  the  Lutherans  would 
never  be  brought  to  the  point  of  voluntary  submission  ;  and  so  early  as 
1531  the  Emperor  would  have  resorted  to  persecution  if  he  had  had 
the  means.  But  from  persecution  to  war  was  a  long  step,  and  he 
would  have  shrunk  from  war  at  that  date  even  if  it  had  been  in  his 
power  to  wage  it.  Before  1545,  however,  this  reluctance  had  been 
removed.  The  logic  of  facts  had  proved  that  it  was  a  death-struggle  in 
Germany  between  the  medieval  Church  and  Empire  on  the  one  hand 
and  Protestant  territorialism  on  the  other.  The  fault  was  partly  the 
Emperor's  ;  b}^  making  himself  the  champion  of  the  old  religion  he  had 
forced  an  alliance  between  the  anti-Catholic  Reformers  and  the  anti- 
imperial  Princes  ;  and  from  1532  onwards  territorial  and  Protestant 
principles  had  made  vast  strides  at  the  expense  of  Catholicism  and  the 
Empire.  It  is  not  necessary,  nor  is  it  possible,  to  determine  which 
advance  alarmed  Charles  most  ;  both  were  equally  fatal  to  the  position 
which  he  had  adopted.  The  threatened  secularisation  of  the  ecclesiastical 
electorates  would  have  converted  Germany  from  a  Catholic  monarchy 


248  His  motives  iii  1545  [1545 


into  a  Protestant  oligarchy  ;  and  such  was  the  meaning  of  the  proposal 
of  the  Lutheran  Princes  in  1545  to  revive  the  dignity  of  the  Electorate, 
when  by  the  evangelisation  of  Cologne  and  of  the  Palatinate  they  had 
acquired  a  majority  of  votes  in  the  Electoral  College.  Nor  was  that 
tlie  only  danger.  A  portion  of  the  Netherlands  would  naturally  follow 
the  religious  lead  of  its  metropolitan  city,  Cologne  ;  the  accession  of  the 
Palatinate  to  the  Lutheran  cause  threatened  the  Habsburg  lands  in 
Elsass  ;  and  a  majority  of  Protestant  Electors  might  mean  a  Protestant 
Emperor  at  the  next  vacancy. 

These  perils,  and  the  persistency  with  which  the  Lutherans  turned 
the  Empire's  necessities  to  their  own  advantage,  convinced  Charles  that 
the  issues  at  stake  were  worth  the  risks  of  war.  He  was  sure  that  there 
was  no  remedy  but  force,  without  perhaps  being  certain  that  force 
was  any  remedy.  At  the  same  time  his  experience  in  Germany  from 
1541  to  1544  had  shown  him  how  those  risks  might  be  minimised. 
The  Landgrave's  bigamj^  had  driven  a  wedge  into  the  Protestant  ranks  ; 
and  the  success  with  which  the  Emperor  had  widened  the  breach  between 
Electoral  Saxony  and  Hesse  had  opened  the  prospect  of  further 
divisions  among  the  Lutheran  Princes.  Charles  declares  in  his  Com- 
mentaries that  his  success  in  isolating  Cleves  proved  to  him  the  lack  of 
coherence  among  his  enemies,  and  made  him  hope  for  victory  in  case  of 
war  ;  and  that  he  intended  in  1544  if  not  earlier  to  make  war  on  the 
Lutherans  is  hardly  a  matter  of  doubt.  He  would  not  have  made  such 
great  concessions  at  the  Diet  of  Speier  in  1544,  had  he  not  foreseen  that 
a  final  settlement  of  accounts  with  France  would  enable  him  to  render 
those  concessions  nugatory  ;  and  the  fact  that  the  Lutherans  fell  so 
easily  into  the  trap  has  been  considered  the  most  conclusive  proof  of 
their  political  incapacity.  Within  three  months  from  the  date  of  the 
truce  with  France  Charles  was  discussing  with  the  Pope  details  of  a  war 
against  the  Lutherans.  People  would  be  glad,  he  wrote,  if  the  Pope 
devoted  to  that  object  the  vast  sums  he  had  amassed  for  a  war  against 
the  Turks,  "  especially  if  the  undertaking  against  the  Turk  had  ceased  to 
be  a  pressing  necessity  "  ;  he  declared  that  one  of  his  chief  objects  in 
concluding  peace  with  France  was  to  be  able  to  conduct  these  two 
wars  against  Turks  and  Lutherans  successfully  ;  and  there  was  a  secret 
stipulation  that  Francis  I  should '  assist  in  his  endeavours.  The  war 
against  the  Turks  had  been  one  of  the  pretexts  for  requiring  Lutheran 
aid  at  the  Diet  of  Speier  ;  but  Charles  was  taking  care  that  it  should 
"  cease  to  be  a  pressing  necessity  "  or  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the  other 
war  he  had  in  his  mind. 

Yet  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  represent  a  religious  war  as  the 
Emperor's  prime  object.  It  would  in  any  case  be  only  the  means  to  an 
end,  and  he  was  still  seeking  if  not  hoping  to  attain  that  end  by  other 
means.  He  had  moreover  greater  schemes  in  view  than  a  mere  conquest 
of  the  Lutherans.     He  was,  though  to  a  less  extent  than  his  grandfather 


1544-5]       A  General  Council  summoned  to  Trent  249 

Maximilian,  subject  to  dreams,  and  his  dream  from  1545  to  the  disasters 
of  1552  was  to  assemble  a  General  Council  by  means  of  which  he  would 
reduce  the  Lutherans  to  Catholicism  and  the  Pope  to  reform  ;  then 
having  united  and  purified  Western  Christendom  he  would  march 
at  its  head  against  the  Infidel,  regain  the  East  for  the  orthodox  faith, 
and  be  crowned  in  Jerusalem.  Maximilian  had  contemplated  all  these 
achievements,  and  had  also  hoped  to  encircle  his  brow  with  the  tiara  of 
a  Pope  and  the  halo  of  a  saint ;  but  Charles  would  have  been  content  to 
crown  his  life  with  monastic  retirement.  The  object  immediately  under 
consideration  in  1545  was  the  General  Council  for  which  he  had 
laboured  so  long  in  vain.  By  this  means  he  hoped  to  work  his  will  both 
with  the  Pope  and  with  the  Protestants.  The  Lutherans  had  for  many 
years  expressed  a  desire  for  a  General  Council ;  if  it  met  and  they  accepted 
its  decrees,  unity  would  be  achieved  :  if  they  refused  to  be  bound  by  them, 
the  refusal  would  be  a  justification  for  war  and  a  good  ground  on  which 
to  appeal  for  help  to  the  Catholic  Powers.  Secondly,  the  mere  fact  of 
its  meeting  would  annul  the  concessions  which  Charles  had  made ;  and 
thirdly,  the  demand  of  a  free  General  Council  from  an  obstructive 
Pope  would  enhance  the  illusion  under  which  the  Lutherans  laboured 
that  Charles  was  their  ally  against  the  Papacy.  In  August,  1544, 
Paul  III  had  denounced  the  Emperor's  compliance  at  Speier,  had  re- 
minded him  of  the  fate  of  his  predecessors,  from  Nero  to  Frederick  II, 
who  had  persecuted  the  Church,  and  had  threatened  him  with  an  even 
more  terrible  doom  ;  and  Luther  and  Calvin  had  thereupon  seized  their 
pens  in  his  defence.  The  Pope  in  fact  was  the  chief  obstacle  to  the 
Council ;  but  the  peace  between  Charles  and  Francis  destroyed  all  chance 
of  successful  resistance  ;  and  Paul  III  made  a  virtue  of  necessity  by 
summoning  a  Council  to  meet  at  Trent  in  December.  As  the  Edict  of 
Worms  had  been  dated  the  same  day  as  Charles'  alliance  with  Leo  X, 
so  the  summons  to  the  Council  of  Trent  was  dated  the  same  day  as  the 
Peace  of  Crepy  (November  19,  1544). 

If  Charles  hoped  for  Protestant  submission  to  the  Council  of  Trent 
he  was  speedily  undeceived.  The  choice  of  Trent  was  a  concession  to 
German  sentiment,  but  was  nevertheless  a  Scopov  aScopov.  Trent  was 
only  nominally  a  German  city  :  in  feeling  it  was  almost  purely  Italian, 
and,  on  account  of  its  proximity  to  Italy,  Italian  Bishops  would  swamp 
the  Council  almost  as  completely  as  if  it  had  met  within  Italian  borders. 
The  practical  exclusion  of  deputies  made  the  adequate  representation  of 
non-Italian  sees  impossible  ;  and  the  choice  of  monastic  theologians 
ruined  the  prospect  of  an  accommodation  with  Lutheran  doctrine.  The 
authority  of  the  universal  Church  was  assumed  by  a  gathering  of  Italian 
and  Spanish  Bishops,  who  would  unite  to  maintain  the  extreme  Catholic 
theology,  and  would  only  be  divided  by  the  political  question  of  papal 
or  imperial  predominance.  Even  in  the  more  favourable  event  of  Charles 
prevailing,  the  Protestants  had  little  to  hope  ;    a  few  practical  abuses 


250  Temporising  measures  [l545 

might  be  removed,  but  the  medieval  Church  would  remain  in  essence 
the  same,  and  an  attempt  would  be  made  to  force  them  within  its  pale. 
Hence  they  repudiated  the  Council  from  the  beginning  ;  they  denied 
that  it  was  free.  Christian,  or  General,  the  three  conditions  upon  which 
alone  they  would  recognise  its  authority  ;  and  at  the  Diet  of  Worms, 
which  met  in  the  spring  of  1545,  they  demanded  from  Charles  a  perma- 
nent religious  security  quite  independent  of  what  the  Council  might 
decree.  Nothing  would  ever  have  induced  the  Emperor  to  grant  such 
terms  ;  they  would  have  involved  him  in  the  sin  of  schism  and  cut  away 
the  ground  on  which  his  whole  position  and  policy  were  based  ;  the  one 
weapon  with  which  he  now  hoped  to  effect  his  aims  would  have  broken 
in  his  hands.  So  Ferdinand,  who  represented  Charles,  unhesitatingly 
rejected  the  petition  ;  there  was  nothing,  he  truly  said,  in  the  decisions 
of  Speier  in  the  previous  year  to  justify  it. 

War  thus  became  inevitable,  but  Charles  still  sought  to  postpone  it. 
He  was  not  yet  sure  of  peace  with  the  Turks,  of  the  Pope,  or  of  the 
allies  he  hoped  to  win  from  the  Lutheran  side.  Although  the  Spaniards 
at  his  Court  spoke  openly  of  the  approaching  extirpation  of  Protestantism, 
and  altliough  his  confessor,  Domenico  de  Soto,  reinforced  by  the 
influence  of  Peter  Canisius  and  other  early  missionaries  of  the  Company 
of  Jesus  in  Germany,  was  constantly  urging  him  to  take  the  decisive 
step,  Granvelle  and  even  Alva  were  still  for  peace,  and  the  Emperor 
halted  between  the  two  opinions.  To  bring  the  Pope  to  terms  he 
again  made  show  of  listening  to  the  Lutherans.  He  expressed  his 
intention  of  carrying  out  the  decisions  of  the  Diet  of  Speier,  and 
annoyed  the  Catholics  by  again  holding  out  the  prospect  of  a  national 
Council  on  religion,  in  case  the  General  Council  at  Trent  proved 
abortive.  To  this  national  assembly  was  also  postponed  the  consideration 
of  the  various  projects  of  reform  which  had  been  drawn  up  as  a  result  of 
the  Diet  of  Speier.  The  most  notable  of  them  was  the  "Wittenberg 
Reformation,"  which  was  drawn  up  by  the  Elector  John  Frederick,  and 
signed  by  Luther,  Bugenhagen,  Cruciger,  and  Melanchthon,  although  it 
contains  few  traces  of  Luther's  spirit.  It  recommended  the  establish- 
ment of  a  Protestant  episcopacy  on  the  ground  that  Princes  were  too 
much  immersed  in  secular  affairs  to  exert  a  proper  supervision  over 
those  of  the  Church  ;  possibly  also  it  was  intended  to  reconcile  the 
great  Catholic  Bishops  to  a  change  of  faith. 

During  1545,  however,  the  last  reasons  for  hesitation  vanished.  The 
Turks,  threatened  with  war  in  Persia  and  with  a  dynastic  dispute 
between  Roxolana  and  Mustapha,  listened  to  the  mediation  of  Francis  I, 
and  concluded  a  truce  with  Charles  and  Ferdinand  in  October.  The 
Emperor  had  nothing  to  fear  from  the  Kings  of  France  and  England, 
who  were  then  engaged  in  a  bitter  war  ;  and  Christian  III  of  Denmark 
had  been  alienated  by  the  Schraalkaldic  League's  refusal  to  assist  him 
in  1544,  and  alarmed  by  the  admission  into  it  of  the  Elector  Palatine, 


1545] 


Charles  V  schemes  to  win  allies  251 


who  had  claims  to  the  Danish  throne  through  his  wife  Dorothea, 
Christian  II's  daughter.  Tiie  Council  of  Trent  actually  met  in 
December,  and  Paul  III  offered  12,000  foot,  500  horse,  a  loan  of 
200,000  crowns  and  half-a-year's  ecclesiastical  revenues  in  Spain  for  the 
purposes  of  the  war.  At  the  same  time  the  Emperor's  personal  efforts 
to  check  the  Reformation  in  Cologne  had  failed  ;  Hermann  von  Wied 
defied  both  the  imperial  Ban  and  the  papal  Bull,  and  was  taken  under 
the  wdng  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League.  The  primate,  Albrecht  of  Mainz, 
died  in  September  ;  Charles'  candidate  for  the  vacant  Archbishopric 
received  not  a  single  vote  ;  and  Sebastian  von  Heusenstamm  was  an 
Erasmian  Catholic  who  owed  his  election  to  Philip  of  Hesse's  aid 
rendered  in  return  for  Heusenstamm's  promise  to  purify  his  see.  Duke 
Henry  of  Brunswick  was  defeated  in  an  attempt  in  September  to  regain 
his  duchy  with  the  helj)  of  mercenaries  under  Christopher  von  Wrisberg; 
the  sequestration  of  his  territories  arranged  at  Speier  and  Worms  was 
set  aside  ;  and  they  were  appropriated  by  the  Schmalkaldic  League, 
an  act  of  violence  which  Charles  expressed  his  intention  of  using  as  a 
pretext  for  a  religious  v/ar. 

In  these  circumstances  the  doctrinal  discussions  which  the  Emperor 
renewed  in  the  winter  can  be  regarded  as  little  more  than  a  blind  to 
delude  the  Protestants  or  a  screen  behind  which  he  made  his  prepara- 
tions for  war.  His  representatives  at  the  conference,  Cochlaeus,  Eber- 
hard  Billick,  and  Malvenda  all  held  extreme  views,  and  their  arguments 
were  principally  aimed  against  the  compromise  of  1541.  They  revived 
the  scholastic  dogmas  which  had  then  been  abandoned  ;  and  the  interest 
of  their  discussions  consists,  for  English  readers  at  any  rate,  mainly  in 
the  fact  that  Malvenda  based  his  defence  on  the  teaching  of  a  forgotten 
English  Dominican,  Robert  Holcot  (d.  1349).  Charles'  real  efforts  were 
directed  towards  the  more  useful  work  of  consolidating  the  Catholic 
and  disintegrating  the  Protestant  party.  The  leading  Catholic  opponent 
of  the  Llabsburgs,  Duke  William  III  of  Bavaria,  who  ruled  the  whole 
duchy  since  the  death  of  his  younger  brother  Ludwig,  was  won  over  to 
something  more  than  benevolent  neutrality  by  the  alliance  between  Pope 
and  Emperor,  by  the  marriage  of  his  son  with  Ferdinand's  eldest 
daughter,  and  a  promise  of  the  throne  of  Bohemia  for  their  descendants 
if  Ferdinand's  male  issue  failed,  and  by  the  offer  of  the  coveted  hat  of 
the  Elector  Palatine,  if  the  latter  sided  openly  with  Charles'  enemies. 

Still  more  important  were  the  divisions  among  the  Protestants. 
The  imprisonnent  of  Duke  Henr}^  of  Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel  and  the 
seizure  of  his  duchy  had  alienated  his  Protestant  as  well  as  his  Catholic 
kinsfolk,  including  the  Duchess  Elizabeth  of  Brunswick-Calenberg,  her 
son  Duke  Eric,  and  Duke  Henry's  son-in-law  Margrave  Hans  of  Branden- 
burg-Ciistrin,  who  were  detached  from  the  Schmalkaldic  League  by  the 
promise  of  Henry's  restoration.  Margrave  Hans'  elder  brother,  the 
Elector  Joachim  of  Brandenburg,  was  already  pledged  to  neutrality,  and 


252  Dissensions  in  Saxony  [1545-6 

his  cousin  Margrave  Albrecht  Alcibiad.es  of  Brandenburg-Culmbach  was 
also  brought  into  the  Emperor's  net.  But  these  accessions  of  strength 
were  trifling  compared  with  the  advantages  secured  by  Charles  through 
the  reconciliation  of  Duke  Maurice  of  Saxony. 

Maurice's  uncle  Duke  George  (1500—39),  the  main  representative  of 
the  Albertine  branch  of  the  House  of  Wettin,  had  been  the  staunchest 
Catholic  in  the  north  of  Germany  ;  but  his  father  Duke  Henry  (1539-41) 
had  been  a  no  less  zealous  Protestant.  Maurice,  who  succeeded  to  the 
duchy  in  1541,  when  twenty-one  years  of  age,  was  neither.  The 
hereditary  jealousy  between  the  Albertine  and  Ernestine  Houses  of 
Saxony  was  neutralised  to  some  extent  by  Duke  Henry's  adoption  of 
the  Protestant  cause  and.  bj^  Maurice's  marriage  with  Agnes,  the  daughter 
of  Philip  of  Hesse.  But  Maurice  was  less  influenced  perhaps  by  religious 
motives  than  any  other  Prince  of  the  age  ;  and  he  poured  scorn  on  those 
who  thought  that  the  interests  of  the  State  should  be  subordinate  to 
theological  dogma.  His  Protestant  education  at  the  Elector  John 
Frederick's  Court  did  not  prevent  his  recalling  the  Catholic  counsellors 
of  his  uncle  Duke  George.  He  readily  followed  his  father-in-law, 
Philip  of  Hesse,  in  making  a  compact  with  Charles  in  1541,  though  he 
had  not  Philip's  j^ersonal  motive  of  fear  ;  and  he  assisted  the  Emperor  to 
reduce  John  Frederick's  brother-in-law,  Duke  William  of  Cleves.  This 
first  aroused  enmity  between  him  and  the  Elector  ;  the  dispute  concern- 
ing the  bishoprics  of  Meissen  and  Merseburg  increased  it ;  and  a  fresh 
source  of  discord  arose  in  the  question  of  the  protectorate  of  the  sees  of 
Magdeburg  and  Halberstadt,  which  Maurice  wanted  for  himself  and 
declared  that  John  Frederick  coveted.  Carlowitz,  an  old  adviser  of 
Duke  George  and  a  member  of  one  of  the  noble  families  of  Meissen, 
which  had  sided  against  John  Frederick  as  to  the  question  of  the 
bishopric,  was  untiring  in  his  efforts  to  win  over  Maurice  from  the 
Elector's  side  to  that  of  the  Emperor  ;  and  the  attempts  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Cologne  to  reconcile  the  cousins  in  the  summer  of  1546  proved 
futile.  Luther  had  succeeded  in  allaying  their  quarrels  about  Meissen  ; 
but  Luther  was  now  no  more.  He  passed  away  on  February  18,  1546, 
full  of  forebodings  of  evil  to  come,  and  more  dominated  than  ever  by 
wrath  against  Sacramentaries  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Pope  on  the 
other ;  and  revenge  was  taken  for  his  diatribes  against  Rome  by  the 
invention  of  a  legend  that  the  great  reformer  died  by  his  own  hand. 

Luther  had  ample  justification  for  gloomy  vaticinations,  and  the 
internal  weakness  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League  was  doubtless  one  of 
Maurice's  most  powerful  motives  for  refusing  to  trust  his  fortunes  in  so 
ill-found  a  vessel.  Bucer  proposed  a  dictatorship  as  the  only  cure,  and 
Philip  of  Hesse  would  naturally  be  his  choice  for  the  olifice.  Maurice,  on 
the  other  hand,  who  could  not  expect  to  rank  above  Philip  or  John 
Frederick,  suggested  a  triumvirate,  and  refused  Philip's  invitation  to 
enter  the  League  as  it  was  then  constituted.     A  prolonged  diet  of  the 


1545-6]  The  Diet  of  Ratishon.    Charles  V^s  diplomacy    253 

League  was  held  at  Frankfort  from  December,  1545,  to  February,  1546, 
without  resulting  in  harmony  between  Philip  and  John  Frederick  or  in 
the  adoption  of  satisfactory  financial  or  military  preparations  for  war. 
Philip  had  been  alarmed  early  in  1545  by  rumours  of  the  approaching 
peace  with  the  Turks,  and  wished  to  send  embassies  to  England,  France, 
and  Denmark,  to  form  an  alliance  with  the  Swiss  and  with  Holland, 
and  to  take  the  offensive  before  Charles'  measures  were  complete.  But 
John  Frederick  believed  in  peace  to  the  last.  He  was  deluded  by 
Charles'  assurances  that  he  meant  no  war  on  the  Lutherans,  but  rather 
another  expedition  against  Algiers,  and  by  the  Emperor's  apparent 
confidence  in  peace,  evinced  by  his  crossing  Germany  almost  unattended 
from  the  Netherlands  to  Ratisbon,  which  base  it  was  in  fact  essential 
for  Charles  to  reach. 

So  the  time  passed  until  the  opening  of  the  Diet  at  Ratisbon  in 
June,  1546.  Eric  of  Brunswick,  Margrave  Hans  of  Ciistrin,  and  some 
other  Protestants  whom  Charles  had  won  over  were  present  ;  but  Philip 
and  John  Frederick  were  absent.  Maurice,  who  was  still  ostensibly  on 
the  best  of  terms  with  his  cousin  and  his  father-in-law,  was  told  by 
Granvelle  that  he  must  come  to  Ratisbon  to  conclude  his  agreement 
with  the  Emperor.  Maurice  came,  but  he  was  determined  not  to  sell 
himself  too  cheaply.  Besides  the  grant  of  the  practical  administration 
of  Magdeburg  and  Halberstadt,  a  demand  which  ran  counter  to  all 
the  principles  Charles  was  bent  on  enforcing,  he  required  the  transference 
to  himself  of  his  cousin's  electoral  dignity  and  —  what  cost  Charles  a 
greater  effort  to  concede  —  immunity  from  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  so  far  as  they  might  touch  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith, 
clerical  marriages,  and  communion  in  both  elements.  Without  these 
concessions  Maurice  despaired  of  maintaining  his  position  in  Protestant 
Saxony,  and  with  some  modifications  they  were  all  granted  by  Charles. 
The  Emperor's  confessor  had  advised  him  to  tempt  some  of  the  Protes- 
tant Princes  with  the  bait  of  their  neighbours'  vineyards  ;  but  it  was  a 
sore  test  for  Charles  when,  in  order  to  .attain  his  purpose,  he  had  to 
grant  in  private  to  particular  Princes  terms  which  he  refused  to  them  all 
in  public,  and  to  surrender  that  principle  of  submission  to  the  Church 
on  which  the  whole  war  was  based. 

Somewhat  similar  verbal  assurances  were  made  to  Hans  of  Ciistrin, 
Albrecht  of  Culmbach,  and  Eric  of  Brunswick.  On  June  7  the  treaty 
with  Bavaria  was  formally  signed,  and  two  days  later  that  with  the 
Pope.  But  the  Diet  still  continued  ;  and  on  the  13th  the  Protestants 
repudiated  the  Council  of  Trent  and  demanded  instead  a  national  Council. 
Pending  its  decisions  the  compromise  of  Speier  should  remain  in 
force.  Charles  laughed  ;  he  had  already  given  orders  for  mobilisation. 
Encouraged  by  the  success  of  his  diplomacy  in  dividing  the  Protestants 
and  by  the  singularly  favourable  aspect  of  foreign  affairs,  urged  on  by  the 
exhortation  of  his  Spanish  subjects,  possibly  carried  away  to  some  extent 


25J:  Was  the  war  religious  or  political  f  [i546 

by  the  rising  theological  temper,  of  which  the  murder  of  an  unfortunate 
Protestant,  Juan  Diaz,  and  its  othcial  api^roval,  were  signs,  Charles  had 
taken  the  plunge,  and  on  May  24  he  had  announced  to  his  sister  Maria 
his  resolve  to  begin  the  war  of  religion. 

The  Elector  of  Saxony  must  have  been  the  only  leading  Protestant 
who  was  surprised  by  the  decision.  Philip  of  Hesse  had  long  been 
seeking  in  vain  to  awake  the  Schmalkaldic  League  from  its  lethargy. 
But,  expected  or  not,  the  war  certainly  found  the  Protestants  unfitted  if 
not  unprepared  to  cope  with  the  crisis.  Long  immunity  had  created  a 
false  sense  of  security  ;  and  the  League,  whose  military  strength  appeared 
imposing,  was  honeycombed  with  disaffection.  It  had  not  escaped  the 
workings  of  that  particularism  which  had  proved  fatal  to  the  Swabian 
League  and  to  the  Reichsregiment ;  and  its  members  were  discontented 
because  it  could  not  grind  all  their  private  axes.  The  cities,  and  still  more 
the  knights,  were  hostile  as  ever  to  the  encroaching  territorial  power  of 
the  Princes,  among  whom  Philip  of  Hesse  was  considered  the  protagonist. 
At  his  door  was  laid  theruin  of  Sickingen,  and  Sickingen's  son  mustered 
many  a  knight  to  Charles'  standard.  Charles  moreover  could  appeal  to 
public  opinion  as  the  champion  of  the  imperial  constitution,  which  the 
Lutheran  Princes  attacked  without  suggesting  a  substitute.  They  had 
repudiated  the  Kammergerieht^  protested  against  the  Diet's  recesses 
whenever  they  pleased,  and  denied  the  authority  of  General  Councils 
and  of  the  Emperor  himself  ;  he  was  no  longer  Emperor,  they  said,  but 
a  bailiff  of  the  Pope.  But  if  authority  were  denied  to  all  these 
institutions,  where  was  the  bulwark  against  anarchy  ?  They  might  seem 
to  have  resolved  that  the  Empire  should  not  exist  at  all  unless  it 
served  their  particular  purpose. 

It  was  this  aspect  of  lawlessness  which  enabled  Charles  to  pretend  that 
the  war  was  waged,  not  against  any  form  of  religion,  but  against  rebel- 
lion. When  Hans  of  Ciistrin's  chaplains  were  preaching  the  purest  word 
of  Lutheranism  within  the  lines  of  the  Emperor's  camp,  who  could  say 
that  Charles  was  warring  on  Lutheran  doctrine?  Henry  VIII  told  the 
Schmalkaldic  envoys  that  if  they  were  threatened  on  account  of  religion 
he  would  come  to  their  aid,  but  he  could  not  see  that  such  was  the  case 
when  so  many  Protestant  Princes  were  fighting  on  Charles'  side.  The 
Emperor  spared  no  pains  to  foster  this  public  impression.  On  this 
ground  he  persuaded  the  Swiss  to  remain  neutral,  and  endeavoured  to 
detach  the  south  German  towns  from  the  cause  of  the  Princes.  He 
sought,  in  fact,  to  isolate  Philip  and  John  Frederick  as  he  had  isolated 
William  of  Cleves  in  1543,  and  to  represent  his  offence  and  theirs  as 
the  same.  In  the  ban  which  was  proclaimed  against  them  on  July  20 
he  recalled  the  Pack  conspiracy  of  1528,  the  invasion  of  Wiirttemberg 
in  1534,  and  the  two  wars  in  Brunswick  ;  and  held  up  the  Princes  to 
reprobation  as  contemners  of  public  authority  and  disturbers  of  the 
peace  of  the  Empire. 


1546]  The  position  of  the  Schmalkaldic  League  255 

And  yet  Paul  III  was  declaring  at  the  same  moment  that  the  war 
was  due  to  injuries  done  to  the  Church  and  to  the  Princes'  refusal  to 
acknowledge  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  sent  the  cross  to  his  Legate 
Alessandro  Farnese,  and  offered  indulgences  to  all  who  assisted  in  the 
extirpation  of  heresy.  In  his  eyes  at  least  the  war  was  a  crusade,  and  as 
such  he  commended  it  to  the  Catholic  Swiss.  The  Emperor  himself  in 
his  private  utterances  confirmed  this  view.  To  his  sister  he  admitted  that 
the  charges  against  Philip  and  John  Frederick  were  a  pretext  intended 
to  disguise  the  real  issue  of  the  war.  To  his  son  he  wrote  that  his  inten- 
tion had  been  and  was  to  wage  war  in  defence  of  religion,  and  that  the 
public  declarations  about  punishing  disobedience  were  only  made  for  the 
sake  of  expediency  ;  and  when  the  war  was  over  he  told  the  Diet  of 
Augsburg  that  the  disturbance  had  originated  in  religious  schism. 

There  was  no  irreconcilable  contradiction  between  the  two  con- 
tentions. To  repudiate  Charles'  religion  was  a  civil  as  well  as  an 
ecclesiastical  offence,  because  it  was  impossible  to  distinguish  in  Charles 
the  person  of  the  Emperor  from  the  person  of  the  protector  of  the 
Church,  just  as  Henry  VIII  made  it  impossible  for  men  to  distinguish 
in  him  the  Supreme  Head  from  the  sovereign.  Henry  utilised  the 
divinity  which  hedged  a  king  to  combat  the  divinity  of  Rome  ;  Charles 
employed  the  remnants  of  respect  for  the  imperial  authority  to  ex- 
tinguish Lutheran  doctrine.  It  was  always  possible  to  represent  heresy 
as  treason  so  long  as  Church  and  State  were  but  two  aspects  of  one 
body  politic  ;  it  was  always  expedient  to  do  so  because  the  State  in 
the  sixteenth  century  was  a  more  popular  institution  than  the  Church  ; 
numbers  confessed  to  heresy,  but  few  would  confess  to  treason. 

To  all  these  advantages  the  Schmalkaldic  League  could  oppose  in 
July,  1546,  an  undoubted  superiority  of  military  force.  Charles  would 
depend  mainly  upon  troops  from  the  Netherlands,  and  his  own  and  the 
papal  levies  from  Spain  and  Italy.  But  the  whole  breadth  of  Germany 
separated  him  from  the  one  and  the  Alps  from  the  other  ;  and  prompt 
offensive  action  on  the  part  of  the  League  would  have  ended  the  war 
in  a  month.  Promptness  and  boldness  were,  however,  the  last  qualities 
to  be  expected  from  the  League.  Every  question  had  to  be  referred  by 
the  commanders  in  the  field  to  the  League's  council  of  war,  where 
it  was  generally  made  the  subject  of  acrimonious  discussion  between 
representatives  of  the  south  German  cities  and  the  Princes,  or  between 
the  adherents  of  the  adventurous  Philip  of  Hesse  and  the  sluggish 
Elector  of  Saxony.  They  were  afraid  to  take  the  offensive  lest  it  should 
damage  their  cause  in  public  opinion.  In  particular  they  would  not 
violate  Bavarian  territory,  wherein  Charles  was  established  at  Ratisbon, 
lest  Bavaria  should  be  driven  into  the  Emperor's  arms,  where  as  a  matter 
of  fact  it  was  already  reposing.  This  timidity  ruined  their  best  chance 
of  success.  Schartlin,  the  ablest  of  the  League's  commanders,  who  led 
the  forces    of   Ulm   and   Augsburg,  had   conceived  the   bold  plan  of 


256  The  Schmalkaldic  War  [i546 

marching  south-west,  and  closing  the  Tyrolese  passes  against  Charles' 
Spanish  and  Italian  levies.  This  could  probably  have  been  effected 
without  much  difficulty,  and  the  Emperor  would  thus  have  been 
rendered  powerless  in  Germany  ;  for  the  Tyrolese  peasantry  had  sympa- 
thies with  the  Protestant  cause,  and  their  experience  of  Spanish  and 
Italian  mercenaries  in  1532  made  them  anxious  to  keep  them  at  a  distance. 
Schartlin  actually  crossed  the  Danube,  seized  Fiissen  and  the  Ehrenberg 
pass  ;  but  the  League  based  fond  hopes  upon  Ferdinand's  conciliatory 
attitude,  and  its  reluctance  to  offend  him  spoilt  Schartlin's  plan,  as  its 
fear  of  Bavaria  had  prevented  the  proposed  seizure  of  Ingolstadt  and 
march  on  Ratisbon. 

Recalled  from  the  south,  Schartlin  occupied  Donauworth,  a  city  where 
the  Catholic  Fuggers  were  strong  ;  and  liere  he  was  joined  by  the  Elector 
and  the  Landgrave.  The  total  force  now  amounted  to  fifty  thousand 
foot  and  seven  thousand  horse,  but  this  formidable  army  wasted  the 
whole  month  of  August,  while  Charles  advanced  to  Landshut  with  little 
more  than  six  thousand  men,  and  effected  a  junction  with  his  Italian 
and  Spanish  troops.  He  then  moved  on  to  Ingolstadt  and  threatened 
to  cut  the  Protestant  communications  with  Upper  Swabia,  whence  they 
drew  their  supplies.  On  the  last  day  of  August  the  two  armies  were 
only  separated  by  a  few  miles  of  swamp.  Philip  of  Hesse  succeeded  in 
planting  a  hundred  and  t^n  guns  within  range  of  the  imperial  camp  ; 
but  the  bombardment  failed  to  compel  Charles  either  to  attack  or 
to  evacuate,  while  the  Protestants,  for  reasons  which  were  afterwards 
disputed  between  Philip  and  Schartlin,  declined  to  risk  an  assault  on 
Charles'  entrenchments.  The  only  result  was  a  series  of  indecisive 
skirmishes  between  the  light  horse  of  either  party  ;  but  the  Emperor 
gradually  extended  his  control  up  the  banks  of  the  Danube  in  the  direc- 
tion of  the  forces  from  the  Netherlands  under  van  Buren,  who  crowned 
a  brilliant  march  across  Germany  by  eluding  the  main  Protestant  army 
and  uniting  with  Charles  at  Ingolstadt  on  September  17. 

The  Emperor  could  now  assume  the  offensive.  The  Neumark  terri- 
tories of  the  Count  Palatine  Otto  Henry,  a  zealous  Protestant,  were 
overrun,  and  the  imperial  army  made  for  Nordlingen.  The  Protestants, 
however,  keeping  to  the  high  ground  and  resisting  all  Alva's  tempta- 
tions to  come  down  and  fight,  headed  Charles  off,  and  he  thereupon 
turned  south-west  towards  IJlm.  Again  he  was  anticipated  ;  Ulra  was 
too  strong  to  be  taken  by  the  camisado  which  Charles  proposed,  and 
the  climate  and  lack  of  money  began  to  tell  heavily  upon  his  southern 
troops.  Three  thousand  Italians  deserted  in  one  day,  and  death  thinned 
the  Emperor's  ranks  as  fast  as  desertion.  The  term  during  which  the 
papal  auxiliaries  were  bound  to  serve  would  expire  in  the  winter,  and 
the  Protestants  thought  the  imperial  cause  would  collapse  without  a 
battle.  But  their  own  difficulties  were  hardly  less  than  those  of  Charles. 
Their  German  troops  were  more  inured  to  the  climate,  but  money  and 


1546]  Occupation  of  Ernestine  Saxony  257 

food  were  equally  scarce  ;  and  it  has  been  contended  that  the  League's 
abandonment  of  southern  Germany  was  due  to  financial  straits,  and  not 
to  Maurice's  attack  on  John  Frederick.  The  cities  were  frightened  by 
the  loss  of  their  trade  ;  the  Protestant  lands  of  the  Baltic,  the  French, 
and  the  Swiss  showed  no  disposition  to  intervene.  The  Leaguers  there- 
fore made  proposals  of  peace  ;  but  Charles  rejected  their  terms,  refusing 
to  regard  them  as  aught  but  rebellious  vassals. 

He  had  reasons  for  confidence  unknown  to  the  enemy.  His  diplo- 
macy had  in  fact  made  victory  certain  almost  before  the  war  began.  On 
October  27,  in  his  camp  at  Sontheim,  he  signed  the  formal  transference 
of  the  Saxon  Electorate  from  John  Frederick  to  Maurice,  and  a  few  days 
later  Maurice  and  Ferdinand  entered  upon  the  conquest  of  Ernestine 
Saxony.  The  partnership  was  the  result  of  mutual  distrust.  Maurice 
would  have  held  aloof,  could  he  have  obtained  his  ends  by  peaceful 
means.  But  he  could  not  hope  for  the  Electorate  unless  he  won  it  by 
arms.  Ferdinand  was  preparing  for  war  in  Saxony  ;  and  if  Maurice 
remained  inactive,  he  might  find  himself  in  as  evil  a  plight  as  John 
Frederick,  and  at  the  mercy  of  a  victorious  Habsburg  army.  His  desire 
to  remain  neutral  was  overcome  by  force  of  circumstances  ;  and  the  most 
favourable  view  of  his  conduct  is  that  in  self-defence  he  was  driven  to 
attack  his  still  more  defenceless  cousin. 

However  this  may  be,  Maurice  had  experienced  great  difficulty  in 
inducing  his  Lutheran  Estates  to  concur  in  an  attack  on  his  cousin's 
lands.  His  preachers  had  declared  that  Charles  was  warring  on  the 
Gospel,  and  that  whoever  abetted  him  would  incur  everlasting  dam- 
nation. To  discount  these  denunciations  Maurice  produced  a  declara- 
tion from  the  Emperor  that  religion  should  remain  untouched  where 
it  was  established  ;  he  represented  to  his  Estates  that  if  he  did  not 
execute  the  ban  against  John  Frederick,  Ferdinand  would,  and  that 
it  would  be  much  safer  for  them  politically  and  theologically  that 
Electoral  Saxony  should  fall  into  his  Protestant  hands  than  into  the 
Catholic  hands  of  Ferdinand.  The  counterpart  of  the  argument  was 
employed  by  Ferdinand  to  secure  the  co-operation  of  his  Bohemian 
nobles  ;  it  would,  he  said,  be  fatal  to  Bohemia's  claims  on  Saxon  lands 
if  Maurice  were  to  execute  the  ban  alone.  So  each  Prince  joined  to 
execute  the  ban  ostensibly  as  a  check  upon  the  other,  and  they  agreed 
on  a  partition  of  the  spoils.  On  October  30  Bohemian  troops  crossed 
the  Saxon  frontier  and  terrified  the  neighbouring  towns.  Maurice  under- 
took to  defend  them  on  condition  that  they  did  him  homage,  while  he 
promised  to  protect  their  religion  and  to  treat  the  Elector  with  every 
respect  consistent  with  his  own  obligations  to  the  Emperor.  Zwickau, 
Borna,  Altenburg,  and  Torgau  all  accepted  these  terms,  and  the  greater 
part  of  the  Electorate  passed  into  Maurice's  possession. 

The  news  of  these  events  reached  the  armies  on  the  Danube  early  in 
November  and  exercised  a  decisive  influence  over  the  campaign  in  southern 

C.    M.    H.    II.  17 


258  The  League  begins  to  dissolve  [1546-7 

Germany.  On  the  23i'd  the  Protestant  army  broke  up,  and  John 
Frederick  hastened  to  the  defence  of  his  Electorate.  The  League's  plan 
was  to  leave  an  army  of  observation  in  the  south  to  protect  the  Protestant 
cities  if  attacked,  and  to  occupy  the  Franconian  bishoprics  while  the 
Elector  reconquered  Saxony.  Only  the  last  part  of  the  programme  was 
carried  out.  The  departure  northwards  of  the  main  army  was  followed 
by  a  stampede  among  the  south  German  cities.  The  Protestant  light 
horse  went  home  for  want  of  pay,  and  the  army  of  observation  came  to 
nothing.  Philip  of  Hesse  failed  to  raise  the  peasants  and  artisans  in 
Franconia  and  practically  retired  from  the  contest  ;  while  Giengen, 
Nordlingen,  and  Rothenburg  rapidly  fell  into  the  Emperor's  power. 
The  moment  had  come  for  breaking  up  the  disjointed  League.  The 
southern  cities  had  never  forgotten  their  Zwinglian  leanings  or  been 
happy  in  their  political  and  religious  relations  with  the  north  German 
princes.  They  at  least  had  no  territorial  ambitions  to  gratify,  and,  if 
Charles  could  give  them  security  for  their  religion,  there  was  no  reason 
for  them  to  continue  the  struggle.  Niirnberg,  in  spite  of  its  strong 
Lutheranism,  had  from  the  first  refused  to  fight.  Granvelle,  always 
peaceably  inclined,  pressed  on  Charles  the  dangers  of  war,  and  the 
Emperor  himself  had  not  the  personal  feeling  against  the  cities  which 
he  exhibited  towards  the  Landgrave  and  the  Elector. 

Negotiations  were  first  opened  with  Ulm,  which  stood  out  strongly 
for  a  religious  guarantee,  but  was  ultimately  satisfied  with  a  verbal 
promise  that  it  should  enjoy  the  same  advantages  in  that  respect  as 
Maurice  of  Saxony  and  the  Hohenzollerns.  The  agreement  was  concluded 
on  December  23,  and  similar  terms  were  soon  arranged  with  Memmingen, 
Biberach,  Heilbronn,  Esslingen,  and  Reutlingen  —  all  of  them  among  the 
original  fourteen  Protestant  cities  of  1529.  Frankfort  submitted  two 
days  before  the  end  of  the  year,  and  Augsburg  and  Strassburg  in 
January,  1547.  Augsburg  was  moved  by  the  influence  of  the  big  trading 
families  ;  Anton  Fugger  conducted  the  negotiations  ;  and  the  city  con- 
tented itself  with  Granvelle's  oral  promise  of  religious  toleration.  Next 
came  Strassburg,  the  surrender  of  which  caused  Bucer  and  Jacob  Sturm 
some  bitter  pangs  ;  but  the  dangerous  proximity  of  the  city  to  France 
and  Switzerland  induced  Charles  to  offer  exceptionally  liberal  terms. 
The  others  were  all  compelled  to  contribute  as  much  to  the  Emperor's 
war  expenses  as  they  had  paid  to  his  opponents.  By  February  all  the 
south  German  cities  had  yielded  with  the  exception  of  Constance  ;  and 
the  Protestant  Princes  of  the  south  could  no  longer  hold  out.  Charles' 
old  friend  the  Elector  Palatine,  Frederick  II,  the  lover  of  his  sister  and 
the  husband  of  his  niece,  and  his  old  enemy,  Ulrich  of  Wlirttemberg, 
both  came  to  crave  his  forgiveness.  The  Elector  suffered  nothing  beyond 
reproaches  ;  but  Ulrich  was  forced  to  pay  an  indemnity  of  three  hundred 
thousand  crowns,  to  surrender  some  of  his  strongest  fortresses  to  perma- 
nent imperial  garrisons,  and  to  engage  in  service  against  his  former 


1546-7] 


Successes  of  John  Frederick  259 


allies.  He  was  fortunate  to  escape  so  lightly  ;  he  had  not  learnt  wisdom 
with  years,  and  his  people  detested  his  rule.  Ferdinand  pressed  for  the 
abrogation  of  the  Treaty  of  Cadan  and  the  restitution  of  the  duchy,  but 
Charles  was  afraid  that  such  a  step  would  revive  Bavarian  and  other 
jealousies  of  the  Habsburg  power. 

In  the  north-west,  too,  the  imperial  cause  made  strides.  At  the  end 
of  January  imperial  commissioners  were  sent  to  enforce  the  long-threat- 
ened Catholic  restoration  in  Cologne.  The  Protestant  Archbishop, 
Hermann  von  Wied,  had  been  suspended  by  the  Pope,  and  his  offer  to 
abdicate  in  return  for  a  guarantee  for  the  maintenance  of  Protestantism 
was  rejected  ;  Count  Adolf  of  Schaumburg  was  elected  coadjutor ;  on 
February  25  Hermann  resigned  and  Catholicism  was  forcibly  re-estab- 
lished. In  the  same  month  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick  captured  Minden 
and  regained  his  duchy.  For  these  successes  the  inactivity  of  Landgrave 
Philip  was  largely  responsible.  At  the  critical  moment  his  former  vigour 
was  lost  in  vacillation.  His  son-in-law  Maurice  was  seeking  to  separate 
him  from  the  Elector,  and  Philip  gave  Maurice  warning  when  John 
Frederick  marched  against  him.  But  he  could  not  make  up  his  mind  to 
accept  the  terms  that  were  offered,  and  the  final  catastrophe,  which  he 
did  nothing  to  avert,  left  him  at  Charles'  uncovenanted  mercy. 

The  Landgrave  and  the  Elector  seemed  to  have  exchanged  their 
accustomed  parts,  for  while  Philip  was  wasting  the  precious  moments 
John  Frederick  was  exerting  himself  with  unwonted  resolution  and 
success.  Maurice's  treachery  had  alienated  the  whole  of  Saxony  ;  and 
John  P>ederick's  appearance  at  the  beginning  of  December,  1546,  was 
the  signal  for  a  great  outburst  of  enthusiasm  for  his  cause.  He  rapidly- 
recovered  the  whole  of  his  own  territories,  extended  his  influence  over  the 
sees  of  Merseburg,  Halberstadt,  and  Magdeburg,  and  invaded  Albertine 
Saxony.  He  defeated  and  captured  Margrave  Albrecht  of  Culmbach  at 
Rochlitz,  and  overran  all  Maurice's  lands  with  the  exception  of  Leipzig. 
His  cousin  complained  that  most  of  his  subjects  favoured  John  Frederick,, 
and  thought  of  fleeing  to  Konigsberg.  The  Lutherans  of  Lusatia  and 
Silesia  and  the  Utraquists  of  Bohemia  refused  to  follow  Ferdinand  in 
support  of  Maurice.  They  were  much  more  anxious  to  preserve  their 
own  lands  from  Spanish  troops ;  they  entered  into  negotiations  with 
John  Frederick,  threatened  to  withdraw  their  allegiance  from  Ferdinand, 
whose  hold  on  the  Bohemian  throne  was  at  that  moment  weakened  by 
the  death  of  his  wife,  the  daughter  of  Wladislav  II,  and  received  Joh» 
Frederick  with  open  arms  when  he  crossed  the  frontier.  North  Germany- 
seemed  at  last  to  be  roused  to  a  sense  of  danger;  a  league  was  in 
course  of  formation  including  Magdeburg,  Bremen,  Brunswick,  and 
Hamburg,  and  Christopher  of  Oldenburg  and  Albrecht  of  Mansfeld 
were  prepared  to  support  it. 

At  this  moment,  when  the  fortune  of  war  seemed  to  be  turning,  the 
tide  began  to  set  against  Charles  in  other  quarters.     The  spiritual  and 


260  The  campaign  of  Muhlhei^g  [i547 

the  temporal  head  of  Christendom  could  never  agree  long  together  even 
when  fighting  a  common  foe,  and  Charles  V  and  Paul  III  were  now  at 
enmity.  The  Emperor  had  demanded  the  Council  of  Trent  because  a 
Council  was  essential  to  his  policy ;  the  Pope  had  summoned  the  Council 
because  he  could  not  help  it.  Charles  wanted  to  reform  the  Papacy, 
Paul  did  not.  Paul  desired  an  emphatic  restatement  of  dogma ;  Charles, 
with  his  eye  on  wavering  Lutherans,  required  a  discreet  silence  ;  and  this 
fundamental  difference  between  the  imperial  and  papal  parties  soon 
provoked  a  breach.  So  early  as  July,  1546,  there  were  rumours  that  the 
Pope  would  remove  the  Council  to  an  Italian  city  where  it  would  be 
under  his  exclusive  control,  and  against  this  proposal  Charles  protested 
in  October.  His  concessions  to  his  Lutheran  allies  and  to  the  south- 
western cities  offended  papal  orthodoxy,  while  his  success  in  the  field 
alarmed  a  Pope  who  dreaded  nothing  so  much  as  a  drastic  reform  of  the 
Church  at  the  hands  of  a  militant  Emperor.  In  January,  1547,  the 
publication  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council  on  the  question  of  Justification 
l3y  Faith  extinguished  Charles'  chances  of  conciliating  the  Lutherans  ; 
and  at  the  same  moment  Paul  did  what  he  could  to  prevent  their 
subjection  by  recalling  the  papal  contingent.  To  such  a  pass  had 
things  come  that  the  Pope  was  rejoicing  at  the  Elector's  successes  ;  and 
in  March  the  Council  of  Trent,  on  the  pretext  of  the  plague,  removed 
to  Bologna.  The  Emperor  now  joined  the  Lutherans  in  refusing  to 
recognise  the  Council's  authority ;  while  papal  agents  stirred  up  plots 
against  the  imperialists  in  Siena  and  Venice,  Genoa  and  Naples.  Charles 
overwhelmed  the  Pope  and  his  legate  with  abuse,  and  his  threats  to  find 
a  remedy  for  this  evil  again  turned  men's  thoughts  back  to  1527. 

But  first  he  must  deal  with  the  successful  rebel  in  northern  Germany. 
John  Frederick,  however,  was  not  really  dangerous,  and  the  successive 
deaths  of  Henry  VIII  (January  28)  and  Francis  I  (March  31)  guaran- 
teed Charles  immunity  from  external  complications.  Charles  rose  to 
the  crisis  and  wisely  determined,  in  spite  of  Granvelle's  protests,  to 
march  north  himself.  He  spent  Easter  at  Eger,  and  on  April  13 
crossed  the  Saxon  frontier.  The  Elector  had  formed  a  prudent  plan 
of  avoiding  pitched  battles,  retiring  to  Magdeburg,  and  leaving  Charles 
to  fritter  away  his  strength  in  sieges  ;  but  unfortunately  for  himself 
John  Frederick  could  not  resist  the  temptation  to  keep  in  touch  with 
Bohemia,  whence  he  expected  material  help.  So  he  stationed  part 
of  his  forces  on  the  Bohemian  frontier,  and  with  the  rest  occupied 
Meissen  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Elbe.  Charles  advanced  by  rapid 
marches  through  Plauen,  Altenburg,  and  Kolditz,  cut  off  the  Elector 
from  Thuringia,  and  threatened  his  communications  with  the  north, 
where  he  trusted,  in  case  of  defeat,  to  find  refuge.  Alarmed  by  this 
movement  John  Frederick  broke  up  his  camp  at  Meissen  and  made 
his  way  down  the  Elbe  towards  Wittenberg.  He  hoped  that  Charles 
would  march  on  Meissen  and  thus  give  him  time  to  escape ;  but  the 


1547]         The  Elector  and  the  Landgrave  prisoners         261 

Emperor  went  straight  for  Mlihlberg,  where  he  found  the  Elector  at 
nine  a.m.  on  April  24.  A  bridge  of  boats  was  moored  to  the  right 
bank  of  the  Elbe,  but  some  Spaniards  swam  the  river  with  swords  in 
their  mouths,  cut  down  the  guards,  and  secured  the  bridge.  By  it  the 
bulk  of  the  infantry  crossed,  while  the  cavalry  found  a  ford  higher  up. 
Without  attempting  to  defend  his  position  the  Elector  commenced  a 
retreat  to  the  north.  About  sunset  the  imperialists  overtook  him  and 
routed  his  slender  forces  with  great  slaughter.  John  Frederick  fought 
with  conspicuous  courage,  and  was  brought  into  the  Emperor's  presence 
with  blood  streaming  from  a  wound  in  his  cheek.  Charles  was  not 
generous  in  the  hour  of  victory  ;  he  taunted  the  Elector  with  his  previous 
disobedience,  while  Ferdinand  demanded  his  execution.  A  sentence  of 
death  was  actually  passed,  but  it  was  only  used  to  extort  the  surrender 
of  Wittenberg,  which  the  Spanish  troops  were  afraid  to  storm.  By 
the  capitulation  of  Wittenberg  Maurice  received  his  cousin's  electoral 
dignity,  and  a  considerable  slice  of  his  territories,  while  Sagan  and 
the  Voigtland  fell  to  the  share  of  Ferdinand.  John  Frederick  was 
carried  about  a  prisoner  in  the  Emperor's  suite  ;  but  no  threats  could 
shake  his  steadfast  adherence  to  the  Lutheran  faith,  and  three  years 
later  Charles  secretly  decreed  that  his  detention  should  last  as  long  as 
his  life. 

From  the  Elector  he  turned  to  the  Landgrave,  whose  submission  was 
delayed  by  the  successful  resistance  of  Bremen  to  Eric  of  Brunswick  and 
ChristoiDher  von  Wrisberg,  and  by  the  defeat,  much  more  sanguinary  than 
the  battle  of  Mlihlberg,  which  Christopher  of  Oldenburg  and  Albrecht 
of  Mansfeld  inflicted  upon  the  imperialists  near  the  Drakensberg.  But 
these  victories  only  saved  the  Baltic  lands  ;  in  the  west  Philip  could 
find  no  support,  and  after  much  hesitation  he  was  induced  to  surrender 
by  Maurice  and  Joachim  of  Brandenburg.  The  two  Princes  pledged 
their  word  to  Philip  that  he  should  not  be  imprisoned,  but  for  this  they 
apparently  had  no  warrant.  The  poj^ular  legend  that  the  term  ohne 
einigen  G-efdngnis  (without  any  imprisonment)  was  altered  by  a  secretary 
to  ohne  eivigen  G-efdngnis  (without  perpetual  imprisonment)  has  no 
satisfactory  basis  ;  but  it  is  clear  that  both  Philip  and  the  two  Princes 
understood  that  the  Landgrave  should  go  free,  and  there  were  high  words 
between  them  and  Alva,  when,  after  Philip  had  made  his  submission 
(June  20),  the  Duke  placed  him  under  arrest.  Such  had  been  Charles' 
intention  throughout  ;  he  does  not  appear  to  have  encouraged  any  de- 
ception, and  subsequently  the  two  Princes  admitted  that  the  mistake 
had  been  theirs.  It  was  an  unfortunate  mistake  for  Charles'  reputation  ; 
but  for  the  rest  Philip  escaped  more  lightly  than  John  Frederick,  a 
circumstance  which  he  owed  to  Maurice,  and  not  to  his  deserts.  In  1550 
his  term  of  detention  was  fixed  at  fifteen  years  ;  he  was  to  dismantle  all 
his  fortresses  save  one,  and  to  give  up  his  artillery ;  his  territories  were 
to  remain  intact  and  his  people  unmolested  on  account  of  their  religion  ; 


262  The  Diet  of  Augsburg  [1547 

though  subsequently  half  of  Darmstadt  was  transferred  from  Hesse  to 
the  House  of  Nassau. 

In  the  north-east  of  Germany  the  Dukes  of  Pomerania  made  peace 
with  Charles  through  their  agent  Bartholomew  Sastrow,  whose  memoirs 
present  a  gloomy  picture  of  the  condition  of  Germany  during  the  war. 
Bremen  held  out,  but  more  important  was  the  resistance  of  Magdeburg, 
which  ultimately  defied  all  the  force  which  Maurice  was  able  or  willing  to 
bring  against  it.  A  proposal  to  bring  Albrecht  of  Prussia  to  terms  was 
rejected  lest  warlike  measures  should  precipitate  a  conflict  with  his 
suzerain  Sigismund  of  Poland  ;  but  in  Bohemia  Ferdinand  used  his 
opportunity  to  crush  its  remaining  constitutional  liberties,  and  to  reduce 
it  to  a  footing  more  nearly  resembling  that  of  his  own  hereditary  lands. 

Except  for  Constance  and  these  outlying  regions  on  the  Baltic, 
Charles  was  now  dictator  in  Germany.  No  Emperor  since  Frederick  II 
had  wielded  such  power,  and  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  which  was  opened 
on  September  1,  1547,  he  endeavoured  to  reap  the  fruits  of  his  victory. 
He  never  had  a  greater  opportunity,  but  the  inherent  antagonism 
between  the  aims  of  the  Habsburg  dynasty  and  those  of  the  German 
nation  was  too  fundamental  to  be  eradicated  by  the  defeat  of  a  section 
of  Lutheran  Princes.  The  constitutional  reforms  which  he  laid  before 
the  Diet  were  inspired  by  the  same  family  motives  which  actuated 
Charles  in  1521,  and  they  provoked  the  same  kind  of  national  and 
territorial  opposition.  Bavaria  reverted  to  its  natural  attitude,  partly 
because  Charles  had  quarrelled  with  the  Pope,  but  more  because  he  had 
not  repaid  Bavaria  for  her  exertions  in  the  war  by  an  increase  of  terri- 
tory, nor  shown  any  inclination  to  transfer  the  Electoral  dignity  of 
the  Palatinate  from  his  old  friend,  the  Elector  Frederick  II,  to  Duke 
William.  Maurice  was  not  satisfied  with  the  partial  ruin  of  his  cousin, 
and  felt  that  Charles  had  purposely  left  his  position  insecure. 

The  Emperor's  first  object  was  to  strengthen  the  executive  with  a 
view  to  preventing  such  outbreaks  as  the  Peasants'  War,  the  Anabaptist 
revolt,  the  lawless  enterprises  of  Liibeck,  and  Philip  of  Hesse's  conquests 
of  Wiirttemberg  and  Brunswick.  A  proposal  for  the  preservation  of 
peace  would  naturally  meet  with  much  support  ;  but  that  support  was 
neutralised  by  the  conviction  that  the  League,  which  Charles  proposed  to 
establish  on  the  model  of  the  old  Swabian  League,  was  really  designed  to 
strengthen  the  Habsburgs  against  other  Princes  and  against  the  nation 
itself.  The  League  was  to  embrace  the  whole  of  Germany,  to  be  di- 
rected by  a  number  of  permanent  officials  who  although  representative 
of  the  various  orders  would  tend  to  fall  under  government  influence,  and 
to  have  at  its  disposal  an  efficient  military  force.  This  League  and  its 
organisation  was  to  lie  entirely  outside  the  ordinary  constitution  of  the 
Empire  ;  and  the  Electors  discovered  the  chief  motive  for  it  in  the  fact 
that  the  Habsburgs  would  command  a  far  greater  share  of  influence 
in  it  than  they  did  in  the  three  Councils  which  constituted  the  Diet. 


1547-8]        Protest  against  the  Council  at  Bologna  263 

However,  the  real  flaw  in  the  Emperor's  plan  was  that  he  did  not  seek 
to  reform  the  Diet,  but  left  it  standing,  while  a  new  organisation 
was  introduced  which  was  bound  to  come  into  conflict  with  existing 
institutions  and  could  only  supersede  them  after  a  long  and  wearisome 
constitutional  struggle.  Both  its  good  points  and  its  defects  excited 
discontent.  The  territorial  Princes  feared  to  lose  their  hold  over 
mediate  lords  when  the  latter  would  look  not  to  them  but  to  the 
League  for  protection  ;  the  cities  dreaded  the  expense  of  having  to  keep 
internal  and  external  peace  in  outlying  lands  like  Burgundy  and  the 
Austrian  Duchies.  Bavaria  had  resolved  to  refuse,  even  if  all  the  other 
Estates  agreed  ;  the  College  of  Electors  was  unanimously  hostile  ;  the 
Diet  as  a  whole  disliked  a  measure  which  would  bring  its  own  authority 
into  dispute,  and  Charles  dropped  the  proposal  without  a  struggle. 

He  was  more  fortunate  in  his  reconstitution  of  the  ReichsJcammer- 
gericht ;  he  arrogated  to  himself  the  immediate  nomination  of  its  judges, 
reserved  to  his  own  Hofgericht  questions  of  Church  property  and 
episcopal  jurisdiction,  and  persuaded  the  Diet  to  adopt  a  codification  of 
the  principles  by  which  the  action  of  the  Court  should  be  governed,  and 
to  promise  contributions  for  the  Court's  support.  He  was  able  to  defy 
the  remonstrances  addressed  to  him  on  account  of  the  Spanish  troops, 
which,  contrary  to  his  election  pledges,  he  had  quartered  in  the  Empire. 
He  secured  the  establishment  of  a  fund  for  the  maintenance  of  internal 
and  external  peace,  which  was  not,  however,  to  be  used  without  the 
Diet's  consent ;  and  obtained  preferential  treatment  for  the  Netherlands 
by  means  of  a  perpetual  treaty  between  them  and  the  Empire.  They 
were  to  contribute  to  national  taxation  but  to  be  exempt  from  the 
national  jurisdiction  ;  they  were  thus  partly  removed  from  imperial 
control,  though  Germany  was  perpetually  bound  to  the  arduous  task  of 
their  defence  ;  the  transfer  of  Utrecht  and  Gelders  to  the  Burgundian 
circle  was  a  mark  of  their  incorporation  in  the  Habsburg  inheritance. 

Meanwhile  religion  naturally  occupied  much  of  the  attention  of 
Charles  and  the  Diet.  The  Emperor  vowed  that  even  when  in  the  field 
against  his  enemies  he  had  thought  more  about  the  Church  than  the 
war ;  and  it  was  incumbent  upon  him  to  attempt  some  sort  of  solution  at 
the  Diet  of  Augsburg.  The  problem,  difficult  in  any  case,  was  rendered 
infinitely  more  so  by  his  strained  relations  with  the  Pope  ;  which  the 
murder  of  Paul's  son,  Pierluigi  Farnese,  on  September  10,  1547,  with 
the  suspected  connivance  of  Ferrante  di  Gonzaga,  the  governor  of  Milan, 
of  Granvelle,  and  even  of  Charles  himself,  did  nothing  to  improve.  The 
Pope  was  hardened  in  his  determination  not  to  let  the  Council  leave 
Bologna.  The  Emperor  obtained  a  unanimous  recognition  from  the 
Estates  to  the  effect  that  the  prelates  remaining  at  Trent  constituted  the 
only  true  Council.  They  also  approved  of  Charles'  refusal  to  publish 
the  Tridentine  decrees  ;  and,  going  further  than  he  desired,  they 
demanded  that  Scripture  should  be  the  test  applied  to  all  doctrines, 


264  The  Interim  [1548 

and  that  the  members  of  the  Council  should  be  released  from  their  oaths 
to  the  Pope,  in  order  that  they  might  more  effectually  reform  the 
Papacy.  In  the  name  of  the  German  nation  Charles  formally  required 
the  return  of  the  Council  to  Trent ;  and  when  this  was  refused,  his  two 
representatives,  Vargas  and  Velasco,  solemnly  protested  on  January  18, 
1548,  against  all  future  acts  of  the  Council  at  Bologna,  declaring  them 
null  and  void. 

Was  Charles  also  among  the  prophets  ?  He,  even  as  Philip  of  Hesse  and 
John  Frederick  of  Saxony,  had  protested  against  a  General  Council  and 
refused  to  be  bound  by  its  decrees.  Had  he  been  as  devoid  of  religious 
scruples  as  Maurice  of  Saxony  or  Henry  of  Navarre,  and  had  he  had  only 
German  feelings  to  consult,  he  would  in  1548  have  become  an  ostensible 
Protestant.  But  Charles  would  never  have  bought  a  kingdom  with  a 
Mass  ;  he  preferred  to  lose  a  kingdom  for  a  Mass,  and,  in  spite  of  his 
enmity  with  the  Papacy,  he  was  bent  on  making  Germany  Catholic,  and 
on  using  his  victory  to  decide  questions  upon  which  he  had  declared  the 
struggle  would  not  be  fought.  At  the  same  time  his  refusal  to  accept 
the  Tridentine  decrees  as  the  standard  of  faith  made  it  necessary  for  him 
to  evolve  some  criterion  of  his  own  which  should  serve  its  purpose  during 
the  interval  until  a  German  Council  should  formulate  conclusions  accept- 
able both  to  him  and  the  Pope.  With  this  object  in  view,  after  a 
fruitless  discussion  by  a  committee  consisting  of  representative  laymen 
as  well  as  ecclesiastics,  he  took  into  consultation  Michael  Helding,  the 
suffragan  Bishop  of  Mainz,  who  represented  the  high  Catholic  point  of 
view,  the  Erasmian  Julius  von  Pflug,  whom  the  result  of  the  Schmal- 
kaldic  War  had  at  last  established  as  Bishop  of  Naumburg,  and  John 
Agricola,  whose  views  were  Lutheran,  of  a  moderate  type.  The  compro- 
mise, known  as  the  Interim^  which  this  commission  drew  up,  conceded 
clerical  marriages,  the  use  of  the  cup  by  the  laity,  and  accepted  a 
modification  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  Pflug  also  explained 
away  enough  of  the  sacrificial  character  of  the  Mass  to  satisfy  some  of 
the  Lutherans,  and  denied  some  of  the  prerogatives  claimed  by  the  Pope. 
On  the  other  hand  the  Interim  retained  all  the  seven  Sacraments,  the 
worship  of  the  Virgin  and  the  Saints,  fasts,  processions,  and  other 
Catholic  ceremonies,  and  reaffirmed  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation. 

The  reception  of  the  Interim  by  the  College  of  Electors  was  on  the 
whole  favourable.  Joachim  of  Brandenburg  rejoiced  to  see  included  in 
it  the  three  concessions  which  formed  the  basis  of  his  compact  with 
Charles  in  1541 ;  the  Elector  Palatine  concurred.  Maurice  wanted  to 
consult  his  Estates,  but  Charles  represented  to  him  that  no  provincial 
assembly  could  override  the  decisions  of  a  Diet.  The  Emperor  had 
more  to  fear  from  the  College  of  Princes,  where  the  Bishops  and  Bavaria 
were  preponderant  on  the  Catholic  side.  The  Count  Palatine  Wolfgang 
of  Neumark  and  Margrave  Hans  of  Clistrin,  as  zealous  Lutherans,  of- 
fered a  strenuous  opposition.     Duke  William  of  Bavaria  had  Catholic 


1548]  Results  of  the  Interim  265 

and  other  scruples,  and  referred  them  to  the  Pope.  Paul  III  had  also 
conscientious  scruples  and  remembered  Pierluigi.  He  replied  that  the 
Emperor  had  nothing  to  do  with  matters  of  doctrine,  which  must  be 
reserved  for  the  Council  at  Bologna ;  points  on  which  the  Council  had 
already  decided  should  be  adopted  without  alteration  by  the  Diet ;  and 
on  questions,  which  the  Council  had  not  yet  settled,  the  Interim  con- 
tained several  assertions  repugnant  to  the  Catholic  faith.  Armed  with 
this  opinion  the  College  of  Princes  resolved  that  all  Church  property 
must  be  restored,  that  the  concession  of  the  Cup  to  the  laity  and  of 
clerical  marriages  could  only  be  made  effective  by  papal  dispensation, 
and  above  all  that  the  Interim  must  not  apply  to  Catholic  territories. 
In  other  words,  the  compromise  was  to  bind  one  party  but  not  the 
other,  and  Lutherans  were  to  accept  such  concessions  as  they  had  ob- 
tained subject  to  the  Pope's  grace  and  favour.  Charles  was  incensed 
at  this  attempt  to  spoil  the  concordat,  and  told  the  Princes  that  they 
must  accept  the  articles  as  they  stood.  This  they  refused  to  do.  The 
Emperor  was  compelled  to  give  an  assurance  that  the  Interim  had  no 
other  object  than  the  conversion  of  backsliders  from  the  faith  ;  and 
several  alterations  were  made  in  its  wording  without  the  knowledge  of 
the  Protestants.  In  this  form  the  Interim  was  proclaimed  as  an  edict 
on  May  15,  1548  ;  but  the  vague  terms  in  which  the  Elector  of  Mainz 
expressed  the  Diet's  concurrence  did  not  imply  that  unanimous  con- 
currence which  Charles  read  into  its  declaration. 

It  needed  more  than  sleight  of  hand  to  compel  the  edict's  observance, 
but  Charles  was  resolved  to  stick  at  no  measures,  however  violent.  He 
disregarded  the  oral  assurances  given  to  the  cities  before  their  surrender, 
and  his  councillor  Hase  averred  that  Spanish  troops  should  teach  them 
Catholic  truth.  At  Augsburg  and  Ulm  the  city  franchises  were  violated, 
the  democratic  Councils  purged  of  refractory  members,  and  their  places 
supplied  by  rich  Catholic  merchants  like  the  Fuggers  and  Welsers. 
Constance  yielded  after  a  brilliant  defence  of  its  bridge  which  re- 
called the  exploit  of  Horatius  Codes,  and  surrendered  its  privileges  as 
an  imperial  city  to  be  merged  in  the  Habsburg  domains.  Divines  who 
refused  to  submit  became  exiles.  Osiander  left  Niirnberg,  Brenz  left 
Swabian  Hall,  and  Blarer  Constance  ;  Schnepf  was  driven  from  Tubin- 
gen, and  Bucer  and  Fagius  from  Strassburg.  The  last  two  found  a 
home  in  Cambridge,  and  many  others  came  to  spread  the  doctrines  of 
reform  in  England ;  over  four  hundred  divines  are  said  to  have  left 
southern  Germany. 

In  northern  Germany  the  rulers  who  had  submitted  to  Charles 
generally  accepted  the  Interim,  but  Maurice  was  compelled  to  pay 
tribute  to  Lutheran  sentiment,  and  employed  for  this  purpose  Bishop 
Pflug  of  Naumburg,  the  most  conciliatory  of  Catholic  divines.  He 
was  met  in  the  same  spirit  by  Melanchthon,  who,  much  to  the 
Emperor's  annoyance,  still  enjoyed  safety  and  power  in  Wittenberg. 


266  Resistance  to  Charles  V's  policy  [1548-52 

Melanchthon's  attitude  was  similar  to  that  of  1530,  and  aroused  much 
discontent  among  the  bolder  Lutherans  ;  his  criticisms  of  Luther  and 
John  Frederick  seemed  oblivious  of  his  former  relations  with  them 
and  of  the  facts  that  one  was  dead  and  the  other  in  prison.  At 
a  conference  with  the  Catholics  at  Pegau  he  gave  away  much  of  the 
Lutheran  case  ;  but  the  Interim  met  with  greater  resistance  at  a  second 
debate  at  Torgau  in  October,  1548,  and  was  likened  to  the  forbidden 
fruit  with  which  Eve  tempted  Adam.  At  Celle,  however,  in  the  follow- 
ing month  its  advocates  once  more  prevailed,  and  the  formulary  which 
they  drew  up  was  adopted  at  a  Saxon  Diet  at  Leipzig  ;  thence  it  took 
the  name  of  the  Leipzig  Interim  and  became  the  rule  for  Saxon  lands. 

Over  almost  the  whole  of  Germany  the  Interim  was  now  enforced, 
and  Charles  was  so  elated  by  his  success  that  he  thought  of  pressing  its 
acceptance  upon  the  Scandinavian  kingdoms,  upon  England,  and  even 
upon  Russia.  Yet  his  triumph  was  illusory  and  short-lived  ;  even 
Melanchthon,  who  conformed,  secretly  counselled  resistance,  and  people 
followed  his  private  precept  rather  than  his  public  example.  Three 
years  later  two  English  ambassadors  at  Charles'  court  gave  a  description 
of  the  situation  in  Augsburg.  An  imperial  commission  had  charged  the 
ministers  of  that  city  with  preaching  against  the  Interim  and  refusing 
to  say  Mass  in  their  churches.  The  divines  replied  that  they  durst  say 
none,  being  more  loth  to  offend  God  than  willing  to  please  man ;  the 
Apostles  had  neither  said  nor  heard  Mass ;  and  for  themselves  if  they 
were  in  fault  the  fault  was  no  new  one,  for  they  had  said  no  masses  for 
fourteen  years.  They  were  then  compelled  to  leave  the  city,  which 
remained  disconsolate  ;  there  were  few  shops  in  which  people  might  not 
be  seen  in  tears  ;  a  hundred  women  besieged  the  Emperor's  gates 
"  howling  and  asking  in  their  outcries  where  they  should  christen  their 
children,"  and  where  they  should  marry.  "  For  all  this  the  Papist 
churches  have  no  more  customers  than  they  had  ;  not  ten  of  the  towns- 
men in  some  of  their  greatest  synagogues.  The  churches  where  the 
Protestants  did  by  thousands  at  once  communicate  are  locked  up,  and 
the  people,  being  robbed  of  all  their  godly  exercises,  sit  weeping  and 
wailing  at  home."  Strassburg  and  Niirnberg  were  in  no  better  mood  ; 
when  Charles  required  the  young  Duke  Christopher  of  Wiirttemberg 
to  expel  John  Brenz,  he  replied  that  he  was  as  willing  as  the  Emperor 
to  do  so,  but  it  was  not  in  his  power  unless  he  could  expel  all  his 
subjects  with  him. 

Against  a  spirit  like  this  the  Emperor  laboured  in  vain.  It  availed 
him  little  that  Paul  III  in  his  dying  days  recognised  the  Interim  and 
dissolved  the  Council  at  Bologna  ;  that  Julius  III  repaired  his  prede- 
cessor's error  and  sent  his  prelates  to  Trent  where  Charles'  Bishops  still 
kept  up  the  continuity  of  the  Council  ;  or  that  in  January,  1552,  some 
Protestant  delegates  appeared  there  and  reinforced  the  opposition  to  the 
Pope.     The  reunion  did  not  assuage  the  struggle  between  papal  and 


1548-51]       The  question  of  the  imperial  succession  267 

imperial  influence.  In  the  demand  that  the  points  already  decided  must 
be  reconsidered,  Vargas,  Charles  V's  representative,  concurred  with  the 
Protestants,  and  wrote  to  the  Emperor  a  series  of  letters  exposing  the 
papal  intrigues  at  the  previous  sessions  of  the  Council,  which  has  been 
used  with  effect  by  Protestant  historians.  He  even  welcomed  the 
proposal  of  Maurice's  commissioners  that  doctrines  should  be  tested  by 
the  Scriptures,  and  pressed  hotly  for  a  practical  reformation  of  the 
Papacy.  It  was  Charles'  view  that  if  the  Lutherans  would  come  within 
the  pale  of  the  Church  as  he  defined  it,  they  would  be  useful  allies 
against  the  Pope.  But  his  definition  was  the  Interim^  and  the  effort 
to  force  that  definition  on  his  subjects  electrified  the  atmosphere  and 
prepared  it  for  the  storm  which  Charles'  dynastic  and  absolutist  projects 
brought  down  upon  his  head. 

Nothing  illustrates  more  vividly  Charles'  incurable  want  of  sympathy 
with  his  German  subjects  or  the  incompatibility  of  his  family  ambitions 
with  the  national  tendencies  of  the  age  than  his  attempt  to  force  his  son 
Philip  into  the  seat  of  the  German  Emperors.  National  antipathy  to 
France  had  contributed  more  than  anything  else  to  his  own  election,  yet 
he  thought  he  could  defy  a  far  deeper  hostility  to  the  Spaniards.  The 
foreign  character  of  his  own  aims  had  been  responsible  for  much  of 
the  opposition  he  experienced  in  Germany,  though  he  had  at  least  been 
brought  up  in  nominally  imperial  territory.  Yet  he  imagined  that 
PhilijD  could  succeed  who  had  lived  all  his  life  in  Spain  and  was  purely 
Spanish  in  feeling.  No  Spaniard  had  hitherto  ruled  in  Germany  — 
for  Alfonso  of  Castile  can  scarcely  be  cited  as  an  exception  —  and  the 
Reformation,  added  to  other  causes,  made  it  impossible  that  a  Spaniard 
should  ever  rule  there  in  the  future.  Spain  and  Germany  represented 
opposite  poles  of  religious  and  political  ideals,  and  the  attempt  to 
unite  them  under  one  rule  would  inevitably  have  proved  as  disastrous  in 
Germany  as  a  similar  attempt  did  in  the  Netherlands.  Charles  in  fact 
was  a  hybrid  physically,  politically,  and  to  some  extent  ecclesiastically  ; 
and  the  parts  of  his  cosmopolitan  Empire  necessarily  reverted  to  their 
original  national  types. 

In  his  endeavour  to  perform  the  impossible  Charles  nearly  produced 
a  rupture  in  the  Habsburg  family,  and  alienated  all  the  German  Princes. 
His  plan  was  that  Philip  should  be  elected  King  of  the  Romans  when 
Ferdinand  became  Emperor,  and  that  thus  after  Ferdinand's  death  the 
Empire  should  remain  with  the  elder  line  of  the  family.  Ferdinand  was 
led  to  believe,  however,  that  the  design  extended  to  Philip's  immediate 
succession  and  his  own  exclusion  from  the  throne,  and  this  was  the 
current  suspicion  in  Germany.  He  long  and  strenuously  opposed  his 
brother's  plan  ;  and  the  quarrel  between  them  was  only  patched  up  b}'^ 
the  intervention  of  their  sister  Maria  from  the  Netherlands.  Eventually 
it  was  agreed  (1551)  that  Philip  should  succeed  Ferdinand,  but  that 
Ferdinand's  son  Maximilian  should  succeed  Philip.     This  healed  the 


268  The  Emjperor's  position  weakened  [1550-1 

family  breach  but  had  no  effect  on  the  other  German  Princes  ;  and  the 
Electors,  with  ^yise  regard  for  their  own  interests  and  national  liberties, 
unanimously  refused  even  to  consider  the  scheme. 

The  wliole  nation  in  fact  was  growing  day  by  day  more  hostile  to 
Charles  and  his  Spanish  troops.  The  garrisons  scattered  throughout 
the  Empire,  few  though  they  were  in  numbers,  created  the  impression 
that  Germany  was  a  conquered  country  ;  and  Spanish  arrogance  lost  no 
opportunity  of  bringing  this  sense  home  to  the  German  mind.  Granvelle 
was  suspected  of  harbouring  a  design  for  the  partition  of  Germany. 
Hatred,  which  was  at  first  limited  to  the  Spaniards  themselves,  began 
to  embrace  the  Emperor  as  he  repeatedly  refused  to  listen  to  the  Diet's 
complaints  of  their  conduct  and  of  his  infraction  of  his  engagements. 
He  also  wounded  military  feelings  by  forbidding  the  service  of  German 
mercenaries  in  foreign  armies  —  a  practice  which  he  had  often  licensed 
himself — and  by  summarily  hanging  Sebastian  Vogelsberger  for  defy- 
ing his  commands.  Discontent  was  expressed  with  Charles'  proposal 
to  invest  his  son  with  the  Netherlands  on  terms  which  rendered  those 
provinces  an  hereditary  appanage  of  the  Habsburg  family,  independent 
of  the  Empire  and  transmissible  to  female  heirs  ;  and  even  Catholics 
were  oifended  at  the  persecution  to  which  Philip  of  Hesse  and  John 
Frederick  were  subjected.  The  former  believed  that  the  Emperor 
intended  to  carry  him  off  to  Spain,  and  when  he  attempted  to  escape 
his  German  guards  were  exchanged  for  Spaniards.  The  three  lay 
Electors,  most  of  the  Princes,  and  even  Ferdinand,  petitioned  for  Philip's 
release  ;  but  Charles  turned  a  deaf  ear  and  decided  that  his  detention 
should  last  for  fifteen  years,  though  he  was  afraid  to  publish  the  sentence. 

While  Charles'  popularity  in  Germany  was  being  thus  undermined, 
his  prestige  abroad  was  rapidly  waning.  His  power  in  Germany  from 
1547  to  1550  had  really  rested  upon  a  fortunate  coincidence  of  external 
circumstances,  the  absorption  of  England  and  France  in  their  mutual 
struggles  and  the  diversion  of  the  Turks  to  the  East.  But  such  a 
combination  of  propitious  conditions  could  not  last.  By  1550  France 
had  recovered  Boulogne,  established  her  influence  in  Scotland,  and 
compelled  England  to  make  peace  ;  and  it  was  generally  anticipated 
that  this  peace  would  be  followed  by  war  with  the  Emperor.  The  naval 
warfare  in  the  Mediterranean  between  Dragut  and  Charles'  admirals 
began  to  go  against  the  imperialists  ;  and  the  loss  of  Tripoli  (August, 
1551)  more  than  counterbalanced  the  previous  gain  of  Mehedia.  The 
Turk  again  turned  his  attention  towards  Hungary,  where  the  remnants 
of  Zapolya's  kingdom  acknowledged  the  nominal  sway  of  his  son  but  the 
real  rule  of  George  Martinuzzi.  His  domination  proving  intolerable  to 
Zapolya's  widow,  she  appealed  to  the  Sultan,  while  Martinuzzi  sought 
to  make  terms  with  Ferdinand.  Ferdinand's  request  for  assistance  from 
the  Diet  was  coldly  received  by  Charles,  and  his  envoy  in  Transylva- 
nia, Castaldo,  suspecting  that  Martinuzzi   intended  treachery,  had  him 


1550-1]  Mcmrice  prepares  for  deseiHion  269 

murdered  with  Ferdinand's  connivance  (December,  1551).  The  Turks 
thereupon  began  to  advance,  while  the  disputes  of  the  Farnese  in  Italy, 
where  France  supported  Orazio  and  the  Emperor  Ottavio,  brought 
Henry  II  and  Charles  to  the  verge  of  war. 

Under  these  circumstances  men  began  to  desert  the  Emperor's  failing 
cause.  Maurice,  who  had  betrayed  his  cousin,  would  not  adhere  too 
scrupulously  to  Charles  ;  he  was  highly  unpopular  in  Saxony  on  account 
of  his  religious  backsliding  and  his  political  treachery,  and  unless  he 
found  independent  means  of  support  he  would  go  down  with  the 
Emperor's  ruin  ;  his  own  subjects  were  already  thinking  of  placing  his 
brother  Augustus  in  his  place,  and  his  nobles  declined  to  assist  him  in 
the  siege  of  Magdeburg.  So  gradually  he  began  to  dissociate  himself 
from  the  Emperor's  fortunes  ;  he  supported  Maximilian  in  his  opposition 
to  Philip's  succession,  and  the  Landgrave's  sons  in  their  attempt  to  secure 
some  mitigation  of  their  father's  lot.  He  obtained  in  the  autumn  of 
1550  a  useful  basis  of  operations,  being  entrusted  by  the  Diet,  in  spite 
of  the  reluctance  of  Charles,  who  already  suspected  his  intentions,  with 
the  conduct  of  the  siege  of  Magdeburg.  That  city  had  been  placed 
under  the  ban  of  the  Empire  for  its  continued  resistance  to  Charles  and 
to  his  religious  measures  ;  on  September  22,  1550,  its  troops  had  been 
defeated  by  Duke  George  of  Mecklenburg,  but  the  citizens  spurned  all 
proposals  for  submission.  Their  indomitable  resistance  had  stirred  a 
fever  of  enthusiasm  in  Lutheran  Germany  ;  and  the  acceptance  of  the 
task  of  subduing  them  evoked  renewed  taunts  of  "  Judas  "  against  the 
Saxon  usurper. 

But  it  was  not  Protestantism  which  Maurice  intended  to  betray  this 
time.  His  character  remains  to  this  day  an  enigma ;  elaborate  attempts 
have  been  made  to  represent  him  not  merely  as  the  ablest  statesman  of 
his  age  but  as  the  champion  of  German  Protestantism,  consistently 
working  in  its  interest.  According  to  this  theory  his  original  desertion 
of  the  Schmalkaldic  League  was  only  a  necessary  step  towards  his  ulti- 
mate victory  over  Charles  and  the  forces  of  reaction.  To  others  his 
career  appears  to  be  a  masterpiece  of  treachery,  and  Maurice  himself 
a  subtle  intriguer  comparable  only  with  his  contemporary  the  Duke  of 
Northumberland,  who  like  him  played  an  unscrupulous  and  selfish  part 
under  the  mask  of  religion.  In  Maurice  the  territorial  ambition  of 
German  Princes  found  its  most  skilful  exponent :  his  religious  creed  was 
but  an  accident  of  circumstances.  No  pronounced  Catholic  could  have 
maintained  himself  in  ducal  Saxony  or  held  the  Ernestine  electorate  ; 
but  Charles'  help  was  indispensable  for  the  overthrow  of  John  Frederick, 
and  Charles'  help  could  not  be  purchased  without  some  concessions  to 
orthodoxy.  This  object  having  been  achieved  Maurice  proceeded  to  rid 
himself  of  a  dangerously  unpopular  ally  ;  and  he  was  as  successful  in 
choosing  the  right  moment  for  leaving  Charles  as  he  had  been  when  he 
deserted  the  Schmalkaldic  League. 


270    Negotiations  of  German  Princes  ivith  France    [1548-50 

The  popular  antipathy  to  Charles  and  his  Spaniards,  the  genuine 
devotion  of  the  middle  classes  to  Lutheranism,  were  the  levers  which 
Maurice  and  his  fellow-Princes  used  for  their  own  ends.  They  rebelled 
neither  to  free  the  German  nation,  nor  to  redeem  the  true  religion. 
Their  real  motive  was  fear  lest  Charles  should  establish  a  strong  monarchy, 
and  reduce  their  oligarchy  to  the  impotence  to  which  they  had  endeavoured 
to  reduce  his  sovereignty.  This  apprehension  had  begun  to  work  soon 
after  the  battle  of  Miihlberg.  As  early  as  1548  Otto  of  Brunswick- 
Harburg  was  intriguing  in  France  with  Henry  II,  who  suggested  a 
North-German-Polish  league,  the  germ  of  the  later  alliance  between 
France  and  Poland  against  the  House  of  Habsburg.  Negotiations  were 
soon  in  train  betAveen  the  young  Landgrave  William  of  Hesse,  Margrave 
Hans  of  Ciistrin,  Duke  Albrecht  of  Prussia,  and  his  suzerain  Sigismund 
Augustus,  the  King  of  Poland.  The  soul  of  the  movement  was  Hans 
of  Ciistrin,  whose  refusal  to  acknowledge  the  Interim  had  provoked 
the  wrath  of  Charles  V,  and  whose  dominions  in  Cottbus  and  Crossen, 
the  one  surrounded  and  the  other  bounded  by  Ferdinand's  lands,  excited 
that  King's  desires.  In  February,  1550,  a  defensive  league  was  formed 
between  Hans  of  Ciistrin,  Johann  Albrecht  of  Mecklenburg,  and  Duke 
Albrecht  of  Prussia  at  Konigsberg  ;  and  secret  agents  were  busy  in 
foreign  lands,  Schiirtlin  in  Switzerland  and  George  von  Heideck,  a  cadet 
of  the  House  of  Wiirttemberg,  in  England  and  the  Hanse  towns. 

Maurice  had  early  information  of  these  movements,  but  his  advances 
were  viewed  with  suspicion.  Hans  of  Ciistrin  wished  to  exclude  him 
and  the  young  Margrave  Albrecht  Alcibiades  of  Brandenburg-Culmbach 
from  the  league  on  account  of  their  religious  indifference  ;  but  the  threats 
of  the  Emperor  against  Hans  and  Johann  Albrecht  of  Mecklenburg, 
and  Maurice's  success  in  enticing  to  his  banners  the  military  forces  of 
northern  Germany  induced  them  to  listen  to  his  overtures.  For  this 
purpose  his  command  gave  Maurice  every  opportunity  ;  in  September, 

1550,  he  won  over  the  troops  of  Duke  George  of  Mecklenburg  ;  in 
January,  1551,  he  secured  the  Protestant  levies  of  George  von  Heideck ; 
and  in  the  following  month  Hans  came  to  terms  at  Dresden.  The 
deposed  and  imprisoned  Elector  was  the  chief  difficulty  in  Maurice's  path. 
John  Frederick  vowed  he  would  rather  end  his  days  in  captivity  than 
owe  freedom  to  his  godless  and  traitorous  cousin  ;  but  Maurice  carried 
his  point  with  his  allies  ;  and  in  May  Hans  of  Ciistrin,  Johann  Albrecht 
of  Mecklenburg,  and  Landgrave  William  of  Hesse  consented  to  threaten 
the  young  Ernestines  with  open  hostility  unless  they  would  join  the 
league  or  at  least  undertake  to  remain  neutral.  Maurice  also  secured 
Duke  Albrecht  of  Prussia,  and  an  envoy  was  sent  to  France  to  request 
a  monthly  contribution  of  a  hundred  thousand  crowns.     In  August, 

1551,  the  Bishop  of  Bayonne  came  to  Hesse,  and  in  the  autumn  the 
terms  of  an  alliance  between  Henry  II  and  the  German  Princes  were 
outlined.    On  November  3  Magdeburg  capitulated.    To  Charles  Maurice 


1550-2]         Agreeinent  with  Henry  II  of  France  271 

represented  tlie  surrender  as  a  complete  imperial  victory ;  but  in  reality 
the  terms  of  the  capitulation  guaranteed  to  the  townsfolk  the  religion 
they  desired,  and  secured  to  Maurice  control  of  the  city  and  a  basis  of 
operations. 

The  appeal  to  France  involved  a  radical  alteration  of  Hans  of 
Clistrin's  original  plan.  His  object  had  been  merely  defence  against 
the  threatening  aspect  assumed  by  Charles  V,  but  mere  defence  was 
of  no  use  to  Henry  II.  French  support  could  only  be  bought  by 
making  the  league  offensive,  and  offence  was  also  Maurice's  plan. 
Chagrined  at  having  to  yield  the  first  place  in  the  league  to  Maurice, 
and  alarmed,  perhaps,  by  the  terms  which  Henry  II  demanded,  Hans 
broke  away  from  the  league.  A  German  who  was  both  a  patriot  and  a 
Protestant  could  indeed  have  been  offered  no  more  painful  choice.  The 
French  stipulations  were  that  the  Princes  should  undertake  to  vote  as 
Henry  wished  at  the  next  imperial  election,  and  connive  at  his  conquest 
and  administration  as  imperial  vicar  of  the  bishoprics  of  Metz,  Toul, 
Verdun,  and  Cambray.  The  imperial  lands  were  to  be  sacrificed  as 
the  price  of  religious  security,  or  rather  of  princely  privilege.  Particu- 
larism was  at  least  as  strong  a  motive  with  the  Princes  as  Protestant 
or  patriotic  feeling.  They  had  not  crushed  the  knight,  the  peasant, 
and  the  Anabaptist  in  order  to  smooth  Charles'  path  to  absolu- 
tism, but  their  own.  The  Emperor  was  the  last  obstacle  to  the  full 
development  of  territorial  despotism,  and  the  real  inwardness  of  the 
struggle  is  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  the  cities,  Protestant  though  they 
were,  for  the  most  part  stood  aloof  or  sided  with  the  Emperor.  The 
Lutheran  North  remained  passive,  and  the  so-called  war  of  liberation 
presents  many  of  the  features  of  an  oligarchic  plot. 

The  treaty  between  the  German  Princes  and  the  King  of  France 
was  signed  at  Chambord  and  at  Friedwald  in  January,  1552.  Henry 
intervened  in  Germany,  as  he  did  in  Italy,  as  the  champion  of  national 
liberties  against  the  Emperor;  and  while  in  March  he  threw  thirty-five 
thousand  men  into  Lorraine  he  hardened  his  heart  against  the  heretics  in 
France.  In  fact  his  devotion  to  German  freedom  although  more  specious 
was  no  more  real  than  his  love  of  toleration;  and  the  German  lands  which 
fell  into  his  power  fared  at  least  as  ill  as  ever  they  would  have  done 
under  Charles  V.  The  double  face  which  France  showed  from  1532 
to  1648,  Catholic  at  home  and  Protestant  abroad,  was  a  religious  guise 
adopted  to  help  her  in  her  secular  rivalry  with  the  House  of  Austria, 
and  never  did  it  stand  her  in  better  stead  than  in  1552.  In  that  year 
Henry  II  avenged  the  defeats  and  imprisonment  inflicted  on  his  father 
by  Charles  V  and  thus  embittered  the  close  of  the  Emperor's  life  with 
failure  and  humiliation. 

As  the  French  troops  crossed  the  frontier,  Maurice,  William  of  Hesse 
and  Margrave  Albrecht  Alcibiades  concentrated  thirty  thousand  men  in 
Franconia.     The  Emperor  was  not  so  ignorant  of  Maurice's  designs  as 


272  The  Emperor  a  fugitive  [i552 

has  often  been  supposed.  His  commissioner,  Lazarus  Schwendi,  had 
sounded  warning  notes  from  the  camp  at  Magdeburg ;  but  success  had 
made  Charles  confident  and  careless,  and  he  failed  to  realise  the  danger 
until  it  was  too  late  to  organise  resistance.  On  April  6  he  was  thinking 
of  flight  to  the  Netherlands,  but  the  way  was  blocked  already.  He 
suspected  Ferdinand's  loyalty,  and  others  have  believed  that  the  King  of 
the  Romans  had  a  secret  understanding  with  Maurice.  Ferdinand  had 
ample  grounds  for  discontent,  but  there  seems  to  be  no  proof  of  treason 
on  his  part.  Maurice,  who  had  outwitted  the  keenest  diplomats  at 
Charles'  Court,  may  well  have  duped  his  brother ;  he  had  promised  to 
meet  the  King  at  Linz  on  April  4,  but  Ferdinand  was  not  prepared  for 
the  guise  in  which  he  came.  On  that  day  Augsburg  fell  before  the 
Princes ;  the  resistance  of  Niirnberg,  Ulni,  and  Strassburg  alone  marred 
the  completeness  of  their  victory,  for  Bavaria  and  Wiirttemberg  were 
their  secret  allies.  On  the  18th  Maurice  was  at  Linz.  Ferdinand  sought 
to  negotiate  an  armistice,  but  Maurice  refused  to  date  it  earlier  than 
May  26,  and  used  the  interval  to  draw  his  net  round  Charles.  In  spite 
of  the  words  attributed  to  him,  that  he  had  no  cage  big  enough  for  such 
a  bird,  Maurice  did  not  shrink  from  pressing  his  illustrious  fugitive,  and 
hoped,  as  he  said,  to  run  the  fox  to  earth.  On  the  nights  of  May  18-19 
he  seized  the  pass  of  Ehrenberg.  Twelve  days  earlier  Charles  had  been 
foiled  in  an  attempt  to  escape  to  Constance  and  to  pass  on  thence  to  the 
Netherlands.  He  had  no  troops  to  withstand  Maurice ;  but  a  mutiny  in 
the  Elector's  forces  gave  him  a  few  hours'  respite,  and  towards  evening, 
with  a  few  attendants,  he  fled  amid  rain  and  snow  across  the  Brenner. 
The  victor  of  Miihlberg  was  an  almost  solitary  fugitive  in  his  Empire ; 
the  assembled  Fathers  at  Trent  broke  up  in  dismay,  having,  it  was  said, 
no  mind  to  argue  points  of  doctrine  with  soldiers  in  arms ;  and  the 
Emperor's  soaring  plans  dissolved  like  castles  in  Spain. 

It  was  the  darkest  hour  in  Charles'  career,  but  soon  the  twilight 
began  to  glimmer.  The  Emperor  found  a  refuge  at  Villach  in  Carinthia, 
while  Maurice  went  to  the  conference  at  Passau,  where  his  own  troubles 
began  to  gather.  He  demanded  as  the  price  of  peace  security  against 
Habsburg  aggression  in  Germany,  restoration  of  princely  privilege,  and 
a  guarantee  of  the  Lutheran  religion  irrespective  of  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  The  Catholic  Princes  assembled  at  Passau  were 
disposed  to  concede  these  terms,  but  to  connive  at  permanent  schism 
was  incompatible  with  Charles'  rigid  Catholic  conscience.  Nothing 
could  bend  his  iron  will,  not  the  advance  of  the  Turk  nor  the  success  of 
the  French  in  Italy  nor  his  own  personal  peril.  He  insisted  that  the 
question  of  religious  peace  must  be  referred  to  a  Diet.  On  that  point  he 
refused  to  yield  an  inch  ;  and  among  the  circumstances  which  preserved 
so  lai^e  a  portion  of  Germany  to  the  Roman  Catholic  faith  not  the 
least  is  the  unshaken  constancy  which  Charles  V  evinced  at  the  sorest 
crisis  of  the  Catholic  cause  in  Germany. 


1552]  Difficulties  of  Maurice  273 

His  courage  had  its  reward.  Margrave  Albrecht  had  separated 
from  his  allies  and  was  pursuing  a  wild  career  of  murder  and  sacrilege 
in  Franconia,  where  he  dreamt  of  carving  a  secular  duchy  out  of  the 
Bishops' spiritualities  ;  in  six  weeks  he  extorted  nearly  a  million  crowns  by 
way  of  ransom.  Maurice  failed  in  his  attack  on  Frankfort,  where  he  lost 
one  of  his  ablest  lieutenants  by  the  death  of  George  of  Mecklenburg. 
The  advance  of  Henry  II  had  been  checked  by  the  valour  of  Strassburg ; 
Charles  had  released  John  Frederick,  and  with  a  little  help  the  Ernestine 
Wettin  could  raise  a  storm  which  would  drive  his  cousin  from  Saxony ; 
while  Hans  of  Ciistrin  would  willingly  join  in  the  fray  in  return  for  a 
share  of  the  Albertine  lands.  Conscious  that  the  nation  was  not  really 
behind  him  and  that  he  would  lose  his  all  by  defeat,  Maurice  reluctantly 
yielded  to  Charles'  demand  that  the  religious  question  should  be  left 
to  a  Diet.  Margrave  Albrecht  roughly  refused  to  accept  the  peace  ; 
and  when  Maurice  marched  to  help  Ferdinand  against  the  Turks, 
many  of  his  troops  mutinied  and  took  service  with  Albrecht.  The 
Margrave's  disgust  was  not  due  to  zeal  for  the  Protestant  faith,  but  to 
the  fact  that  Maurice  had  played  both  hands  in  the  game  and  reduced 
his  partner  to  a  dummy.  Fortune  seemed  to  be  turning  and  Charles 
thought  of  refusing  to  ratify  the  treaty,  delayed  the  liberation  of  Philip 
of  Hesse,  and  returned  to  his  schemes  for  creating  a  friendly  league  and 
securing  the  Empire  for  his  son.  He  appeared  to  have  learnt  and 
forgotten  nothing,  but  his  advisers  were  more  amenable.  Queen  Maria 
opposed  these  plans,  Ferdinand  denounced  them,  and  the  fear  lest  his 
obstinacy  should  drive  his  brother  into  Maurice's  arms  induced  Charles 
to  submit  and  sign  the  Treaty  of  Passau. 

Reluctantly  the  Emperor  surrendered  for  the  moment  his  dynastic 
projects  and  assumed  the  part  of  the  champion  of  Germany  against  the 
French  invader.  Emerging  from  Villach  and  journeying  by  way  of 
Augsburg,  where  he  could  not  refrain  from  once  more  overthrowing 
the  democratic  government  and  expelling  some  of  the  more  obnoxious 
preachers  who  had  returned  in  Maurice's  train,  Charles  appeared  on  the 
Rhine  determined  to  wrest  Metz,  Toul,  and  Verdun  from  the  French. 
Metz  was  the  key  of  the  situation,  and  it  had  been  amply  provisioned 
and  skilfully  fortified  by  the  Duke  of  Guise.  On  the  last  day  of 
October,  1552,  the  siege  was  formally  opened,  Charles  strengthened 
his  forces  by  an  unscrupulous  alliance  with  Albrecht  Alcibiades.  The 
Margrave's  brutalities  had  roused  all  Franconia  against  him  and  he  had 
been  forced  to  flee  to  the  Court  of  Henry  II  ;  but  Court  life  had  no 
attractions  for  him,  and  the  French  King  hesitated  to  entrust  so  doubtful 
an  ally  with  important  commands.  So  Albrecht  escaped,  captured  the 
Duke  of  Aumale,  and  with  this  peace-offering  came  into  Charles'  camp. 
His  terms  were  the  imperial  sanction  of  his  spoliation  of  the  Bishops 
of  Wiirzburg  and  Bamberg.  "  Necessity  knows  no  law,"  wrote  Charles 
to  his  sister,  as  he   struck  his  bargain  with  the  worst  law-breaker  in 

C.     M.     H.    II.  18 


274  Siege  of  Metz. — League  of  Heidelhei^g         [i552-3 

Germany  and  sanctioned  his  sacrilegious  plunder  of  Bamberg  and  Wiirz- 
burg.  But  Albrecht  could  not  remedy  the  defects  of  Alva's  generalship, 
produce  harmony  between  Germans  and  Spaniards  in  the  Emperor's 
army,  or  make  any  impression  on  Metz.  For  a  month  after  his  generals 
had  recognised  that  success  was  impossible  Charles  refused  to  admit  his 
defeat.  But  at  length  the  havoc  wrought  among  his  Italian  and  Spanish 
troops  by  a  mid-winter  siege  conquered  even  his  obstinacy.  With  a 
grumble  at  the  fickleness  of  Fortune  who  preferred  a  young  King  to  an 
old  Emperor,  he  raised  the  siege  on  January  1,  1553,  and  turned  his 
back  on  his  German  dominions  for  ever.  Success  in  the  war  with  France 
would  have  meant  a  renewed  effort  to  divide  and  crush  the  Lutheran 
Princes,  to  rivet  the  Spanish  succession  on  Germany,  and  to  restore 
the  Catholic  faith.  Charles'  failure  left  Germany  free  to  settle  these 
questions  herself.  Already  meditating  abdication  and  retirement  from 
the  world,  the  Emperor  journeyed  to  Brussels;  he  was  cheered  by  the 
capture  of  Terouanne  from  the  French  and  the  triumph  of  Mary  in 
England,  but  German  affairs  were  resigned  into  the  hands  of  the  King 
of  the  Romans. 

The  evil  which  Charles  had  done  by  his  bargain  with  Albrecht 
survived  his  departure,  and  it  is  a  lurid  comment  upon  the  Emperor's 
reign  that  its  last  days  were  characterised  by  as  wild  an  anarchy  as 
Germany  had  known  in  all  her  turbulent  history.  The  Margrave,  having 
performed  a  last  service  to  Charles  by  saving  his  guns  during  the  retreat 
from  Metz,  proceeded  once  more  to  trouble  his  foes  in  Germany ;  and, 
as  nearly  all  Germany  hated  the  Emperor,  Albrecht  was  free  to  turn  his 
arms  in  whatever  direction  he  chose.  The  League  of  Heidelberg,  formed 
in  March,  1553,  for  the  preservation  of  the  peace  and  prevention  of 
Philip's  election,  consisted  of  Catholics  and  Protestants  and  was  too 
general  to  be  very  effective.  Moreover  Albrecht's  onslaughts  on  Bish- 
ops and  priests  won  him  a  good  deal  of  secret  sympathy.  The  situation 
was  full  of  confusion  ;  the  Emperor,  the  extreme  Protestants,  and  the 
Ernestine  Wettins  and  Margrave  Albrecht,  were  all  in  more  or  less  open 
opposition  to  the  Albertine  Maurice,  King  Ferdinand,  and  the  Heidelberg 
League.  Charles  had  more  than  once  divided  the  Lutherans ;  he  had 
now  divided  the  House  of  Habsburg. 

Maurice  alone  could  restore  peace  to  the  Empire.  His  campaign  in 
Hungary  had  not  been  successful,  and  Zapolya's  widow  with  Solyman's 
help  retained  control  of  Transylvania.  But  Persia  once  more  diverted 
the  Turk's  attention  from  west  to  east,  and  gave  Maurice  and  Ferdinand 
respite  to  deal  with  Albrecht  and  his  notorious  lieutenant,  Wilhelm  von 
Grumbach.  Maurice,  who  had  posed  as  the  liberator  of  Germany 
from  Spanish  tyranny,  was  now  to  play  the  part  of  saviour  of  society 
from  princely  anarchy.  Charles  had  left  the  Empire  to  its  fate,  the 
Heidelberg  League  was  powerless,  and  a  decree  of  the  Reichskam- 
mergericht  against  Albrecht  would  be  a  mere  form  of  words.     Could 


1553-4]  Deaths  of  Maurice  and  John  Frederick  of  Saxony  275 

Maurice  succeed  amid  this  maze  of  impotence,  no  prize  might  be  beyond 
his  reach.  At  Eger  he  concerted  measures  with  Ferdinand  and  de- 
spatched his  brother  for  Danish  aid.  Albrecht,  after  winning  another 
victory  at  Pommersfelden  on  April  11,  renewed  his  ravages  in  Franconia, 
and  his  excesses  were  worse  than  those  of  the  Peasants'  War.  He  then 
turned  against  the  Catholic  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick-Wolfenbiittel, 
and  thought  of  utilising  John  Frederick's  hatred  of  Maurice  and  Elector 
Joachim's  friendship  with  Charles  to  draw  them  both  to  his  side  ;  even 
Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse  was  loth  to  assist  his  son-in-law  against  so 
good  an  enemy  of  the  priests.  On  July  9,  1553,  at  Sievershausen,  the 
forces  of  Albrecht  and  Maurice  met.  It  was  the  fiercest  battle  fought 
in  German  lands  for  many  a  day  ;  beside  it  Miihlberg  v/as  the  merest 
skirmish.  Maurice  won  the  day,  but  lost  his  life  ;  a  wound  from  a  mus- 
ket-ball proved  fatal  on  the  11th,  and  one  of  the  most  extraordinary 
careers  in  history  was  cut  short  at  the  age  of  thirty-two  years. 

The  death  of  Maurice  brought  no  redress  to  his  injured  and  aged 
cousin.  The  Saxon  Electorate  continued  in  the  Albertine  branch  of  the 
family,  passing  to  Maurice's  brother  Augustus,  a  man  of  conciliatory 
temper,  who  had  incurred  none  of  the  odium  attaching  to  Maurice  and 
could  look  for  support  to  his  Danish  father-in-law  Christian  III. 
Charles  V  had  no  longer  a  private  grudge  to  revenge  by  restoring  his 
former  captive.  John  Frederick  did  not  survive  the  disappointment  by 
many  months.  He  died  on  March  3,  1554,  a  classic  instance  of  fortune's 
perversity.  He  suffered  more  severely  than  any  Prince  of  his  age,  and 
his  coveted  electoral  dignity  passed  into  a  rival  House,  never  to  be 
restored  ;  and  the  only  solace  vouchsafed  to  the  Ernestine  branch  was 
the  restitution  of  Altenburg,  Neustadt,  and  some  other  districts  ceded 
to  Maurice  in  1547.  Yet  John  Frederick  was  the  most  blameless  of 
men,  "  the  example  of  constancy  and  very  mirror  of  true  magnanimity 
in  these  our  days  to  all  Princes."  Such  is  the  verdict  of  one  con- 
temporary ;  better  known  is  the  glowing  description  by  Roger  Ascham  : 
"  one  in  all  fortunes  desired  of  his  friends,  reverenced  of  his  foes, 
favoured  of  the  Emperor,  loved  of  all." 

With  the  disappearance  of  Maurice  the  Emperor's  interest  in  Albrecht 
Alcibiades  waned.  It  was  in  vain  that  the  Margrave  beat  the  anti-eccle- 
siastical drum  more  furiously  than  ever,  or  that  many  a  north  German 
Prince  and  city  came  to  secret  terms.  Duke  Henry  of  Brunswick 
displayed  unwonted  vigour  and  defeated  Albrecht  at  Steterburg  on 
September  12,  1553.  On  December  1  the  long-delayed  ban  was  pro- 
claimed, and  a  second  victory  won  by  Duke  Henry  at  Schwarzach  on 
June  13,  1554,  drove  Albrecht  again  as  a  fugitive  to  the  French  Court. 
Peace  was  at  length  restored,  and  Germany  prepared  for  that  Diet  which 
was  to  settle  its  religious  affairs  for  two  generations.  Permanent  tolera- 
tion of  heresy  was  inevitable  in  the  existing  condition  of  German  politics,. 
and  the  prospect  of  such  unwelcome  violence  to  his  conscience  determined 


276  Diet  of  Augsburg  [1554-5 

the  Emperor  definitely  to  witlidraw  from  his  imperial  responsibilities. 
His  formal  abdication  of  the  Empire  was  not  made  till  three  years 
later  ;  his  relinquishment  of  the  Netherlands  only  took  place  in 
1555,  and  that  of  his  Spanish  kingdoms  in  1556  ;  but  the  end  of  his 
reign  in  Germany  may  be  dated  from  the  summer  of  1554,  when  he 
empowered  Ferdinand  to  settle  the  question  of  religion  with  the  Diet, 
but  not  in  his  name. 

The  city  which  had  witnessed  the  birth  of  the  Lutheran  Faith  was 
also  to  see  its  legitimation,  and  on  February  5,  1555,  Ferdinand  opened 
another  great  Diet  at  Augsburg.  No  Elector  was  present  in  person  ; 
of  the  ecclesiastical  Princes  only  two,  the  Bishops  of  Ausburg  and 
Eichstadt,  attended,  and  of  temporal  Princes  only  four,  the  young  Arch- 
duke Charles,  the  Dukes  of  Bavaria  and  Wlirttemberg,  and  the  Margrave 
of  Baden.  The  Catholics  still  had  a  majority  in  the  Diet,  and  it  cost 
them  a  severe  mental  struggle  to  relinquish  the  fundamental  position  of 
Catholicism,  the  seamless  unity  of  the  Christian  Church.  But  common 
action  with  Protestants  in  opposition  to  the  Spanish  Succession,  in  de- 
fence of  princely  privilege  against  Charles  and  of  public  peace  against 
Albrecht,  had  paved  the  way,  not  to  an  agreement  in  religious  matters, 
but  to  an  agreement  to  differ  about  them.  Yet  even  this  compromise  was 
not  reached  till  Ferdinand  had  made  one  more  effort  to  save  ecclesiastical 
unity.  He  proposed  that  the  Diet  should  first  deal  with  the  question  of 
public  peace  and  refer  religion  to  a  Council  or  to  a  conference.  Duke 
Christopher  of  Wlirttemberg  and  the  Elector  of  Brandenburg  were  not 
adverse  to  the  idea,  and  the  latter  even  suggested  the  Interim  as  the 
basis  of  an  agreement.  But  the  hand  of  the  Diet  was  forced  by  the 
Lutheran  convention  at  Naumburg,  which  was  attended  by  more  German 
Princes  than  the  Diet  itself.  Here  it  was  determined  to  abide  by  the 
Confession  of  Augsburg,  and  this  decision  was  upheld  by  the  Elector 
Augustus,  the  sons  of  John  Frederick,  and  the  Landgraves  of  Hesse, 
while  the  Elector  Joachim  hastily  withdrew  his  ill-advised  suggestion 
with  regard  to  the  Interim. 

Thereupon  the  Electoral  College  at  Augsburg  decided  to  deal  with 
the  religious  question  at  once  and  demanded  religious  peace  at  any  price. 
The  Catholic  Princes,  led  by  the  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Augsburg,  pro- 
tested ;  but  Christopher  of  Wlirttemberg  came  over  to  the  Protestant 
side,  and  presently  the  Bishop  of  Augsburg  was  summoned  to  Conclaves 
at  Rome,  necessitated  by  the  successive  deaths  of  Julius  III  and  Mar- 
cellus  XL  The  Protestants  now  put  forward  their  full  demands.  They 
required  security  not  merely  for  all  present  but  all  future  subscribers  to 
the  Confession  of  Augsburg,  and  liberty  to  enjoy  not  only  such  ecclesi- 
astical property  as  had  already  been  secularised  but  all  that  might  be 
confiscated  hereafter  ;  Lutherans  in  Catholic  States  were  to  have  com- 
plete toleration,  while  no  such  privilege  was  to  be  accorded  to  Catholics 
in  Lutheran  territories.    They  sought  in  fact  to  reduce  the  Catholics  to 


1555]  Religious  Peace  of  Augsburg  277 

the  position  to  which  they  had  themselves  been  reduced  by  the  Recess  of 
Speier  in  1529  ;  every  legal  obstacle  to  the  Lutheran  development  was 
to  be  removed,  while  Catholics  were  deprived  of  their  means  of  defence. 

The  Catholics  were  not  yet  brought  so  low  as  to  submit  to  such 
terms  ;  for  months  the  struggle  of  parties  went  on,  and  it  seemed  possible 
that  another  religious  war  might  ensue.  Eventually  a  compromise  was 
arranged  mainly  by  Ferdinand  and  Augustus  of  Saxony.  Security  was 
granted  to  all  Lutheran  Princes  ;  episcopal  jurisdiction  in  their  lands  was 
to  cease  ;  and  they  might  retain  all  ecclesiastical  property  secularised 
before  the  Treaty  of  Passau  (1552),  provided  it  was  not  immediately 
subject  to  the  Empire.  For  the  future  each  territorial  secular  Prince 
might  choose  between  the  Catholic  and  Lutheran  faith,  and  his  decision 
was  to  bind  all  his  subjects.  If  a  subject  rejected  his  sovereign's  religion 
the  only  privilege  he  could  claim  was  libert}'  to  migrate  inta  other  lands. 
There  remained  two  all-important  points  in  dispute.  The  Lutherans 
still  required  toleration  for  the  adherents  of  their  confession  in  Catholic 
States  ;  and  the  Catholics  demanded  that  any  ecclesiastical  Prince,  who> 
abjured  Catholicism,  should  forfeit  his  lands  and  dignities.  The  Catholic 
objections  to  the  first  demand  were  insuperable  ;  and  the  Lutherans  were- 
compelled  to  content  themselves  with  an  assurance  by  Ferdinand,  which 
was  not  incorporated  in  the  Recess,  did  not  become  law  of  the  Empire, 
and  of  which  the  Reichskammergericht  could  therefore  take  no  cognisance. 
The  Catholic  requirement  about  spiritual  Princes  was  met  by  the  famous 
"ecclesiastical  reservation"  which  imposed  forfeiture  of  lands  and  digni- 
ties on  Bishops  who  forsook  the  Catholic  faith.  This  was  incorporated 
in  the  Recess  ;  but  the  Lutherans  made  their  own  reservation,  and 
declared  that  they  did  not  consider  themselves  bound  by  the  proviso. 

The  so-called  Peace  of  Augsburg,  embodied  in  the  Recess  which  was 
published  on  September  25, 1555,  thus  rested  upon  a  double  equivocation, 
and  contained  in  itself  the  seeds  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War.  It  was  in 
fact  no  more  than  a  truce  concluded,  not  because  the  two  parties  had 
decided  the  issues  upon  which  they  fought,  but  because  they  were  for 
the  moment  tired  of  fighting  ;  and  no  half -measure  was  ever  pursued 
by  a  more  relentless  Nemesis.  The  "  ecclesiastical  reservation  "  has  been 
condemned  as  the  worst  sin  of  omission  of  which  Protestant  Germany 
was  guilty,  as  a  criminal  and  cowardly  evasion  of  a  vital  decision,  which 
delay  could  only  make  more  difficult.  The  artificial  perpetuation  of 
spiritual  principalities  only  served  to  buttress  the  Habsburg  power  and 
postpone  the  achievement  of  national  unity.  In  the  other  scale  a  Catholic 
would  place  the  fact  that  to  the  rescue  of  the  ecclesiastical  Electorates 
from  the  rising  tide  of  Protestantism  must  be  attributed  in  no  small 
measure  the  hold  which  Catholicism  still  retains  on  western  Germany. 

This  lame  and  halting  conclusion  of  nearly  forty  years'  strife  has  been 
hailed  as  the  birth  of  religious  liberty ;  but  it  is  mockery  to  describe 
the  principle  which  underlay  the  Peace  of  Augsburg  as  one  of  toleration. 


278  Cujus  regio  ejus  religio 

Cujus  regio  ejus  religio  is  a  maxim  as  fatal  to  true  religion  as  it  is  to 
freedom  of  conscience  ;  it  is  the  creed  of  Erastian  despotism,  the  formula 
in  which  the  German  territorial  Princes  expressed  the  fact  that  they  had 
mastered  the  Church  as  well  as  the  State.  Even  for  Princes  religious 
liberty  was  limited  to  the  choice  of  one  out  of  two  alternatives,  the 
dogmas  of  Rome  or  those  of  Wittenberg.  The  door  of  Germany  was 
barred  against  Zwingli,  Calvin,  and  Socinus  ;  and  in  neither  the  Lutheran 
nor  the  Roman  Church  was  there  the  same  latitude  that  there  was  in  the 
Catholic  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  onslaughts  of  her  enemies 
compelled  Rome  to  define  her  doctrines  and  to  narrow  her  communion  ; 
if  the  Catholic  Church  was  purified  in  the  process,  it  was  also  rendered 
more  Puritan  ;  it  became  exclusive  rather  than  comprehensive,  Roman 
rather  than  Catholic.  To  define  the  faith  is  to  limit  the  faithful  ;  the 
age  was  one  of  definitions,  and  it  destroyed  for  ever  the  hope  of  a  real 
Catholicism. 

But  even  this  meagre  liberty  of  choice  between  two  exclusive  com- 
munions was  denied  to  the  mass  of  the  German  people.  For  them  the 
change  consisted  in  this,  that  instead  of  having  their  faith  determined 
for  them  by  the  Church,  it  was  settled  by  their  territorial  Princes  ; 
instead  of  a  clerical,  there  was  a  lay  persecution ;  instead  of  a  remote 
prospect  of  being  burnt,  the  German  dissenter,  after  1555,  enjoyed  a 
much  more  imminent  prospect  of  being  banished  ;  for  the  tyranny  of 
Wittenberg,  if  it  was  less  than  that  of  Rome  after  the  Council  of  Trent, 
was  certainly  greater  than  that  of  the  Catholic  Church  before  the  appear- 
ance of  Luther.  Luther  enunciated  the  principle  of  religious  liberty, 
of  individual  priesthood.  But  he  and  his  followers  imposed  another 
bondage,  which  went  far  to  render  this  declaration  ineffectual.  The  chief 
actual  contribution  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  to  religious  liberty  was 
thus  indirect,  almost  undesigned.  It  produced  the  first  Church  inde- 
pendent of  Rome,  and  prepared  the  way  for  countless  other  religious 
communities,  which,  however  narrowly  they  may  define  their  individual 
formularies,  tend  by  their  number  to  enforce  mutual  toleration.  Private 
morality  has  been  evolved  out  of  the  conflicting  interests  of  an  infinite 
mass  of  individuals  ;  international  law  depends  upon  the  multii^licity 
of  independent  States  ;  and  the  best  guarantee  for  the  freedom  of 
conscience  consists  in  the  multitude  and  relative  impotence  of  the 
Churches. 

There  is  no  more  disappointing  epoch  in  German  history  than  the 
reign  of  Charles  V;  if  in  its  course  it  shattered  some  idols,  it  also 
shattered  ideals.  It  began  full  of  hope,  and  the  nation  seemed  young. 
There  were  plans  for  reforming  the  Church  and  renewing  the  Empire ; 
no  one  dreamt  of  dividing  the  one  and  destroying  the  other.  Yet  such 
was  the  result.  The  Reformation  began  with  ideas  and  ended  in  force. 
In  the  Germany  of  the  sixteenth,  as  in  that  of  the  nineteenth  century,  an 
era  of  liberal  thought  closed  in  a  fever  of  war ;  the  persuasions  of  sweetness 


Results  of  tJie  Reformation  in  Germany  279 

and  light  were  drowned  by  the  beat  of  the  drum  and  the  blare  of  the 
trumpet ;  and  methods  of  blood  and  iron  supplanted  the  forces  of  reason. 
No  ideas,  it  was  found,  in  religion  or  politics,  could  survive  unless  they 
were  cast  in  the  hard  material  mould  of  German  territorialism. 

The  triumph  of  this  principle  is  really  the  dominant  note  of  the  period. 
Territorialism  ruined  the  Empire,  captured  the  Reformation,  crushed 
the  municipal  independence  of  the  cities,  and  lowered  the  status  of 
the  peasant.  The  fall  of  the  imperial  power  was  perhaps  inevitable, 
but  it  was  hastened  by  Charles  V.  In  the  first  place,  his  dynastic  and 
Spanish  policy  weakened  his  authority  as  a  national  monarch  ;  in  the 
second,  his  adoption  of  the  cause  of  the  Church  threw  the  Reformers 
into  the  arms  of  the  territorial  Princes.  The  success  of  the  Reforma- 
tion thus  meant  that  of  the  oligarchic  principle  and  the  ruin  of  German 
monarchy.  The  Reformation  of  the  Empire  became  incompatible  with 
the  Reformation  of  the  Church  ;  and  the  seal  on  Charles'  failure  was  set 
by  the  Diet  of  Augsburg,  which,  besides  concluding  a  truce  of  religion, 
removed  the  Meichskammergericht,  the  organisation  of  the  Circles,  and 
the  preservation  of  the  peace  from  the  sphere  of  imperial  influence. 
Henceforward  Germany  was  not  a  kingdom,  but  a  collection  of  petty 
States,  whose  rulers  were  dominated  by  mutual  jealousies.  From  the 
time  of  Charles  V  to  that  of  Frederick  the  Great,  Germany  ceased  to 
be  an  international  force  ;  it  was  rather  the  arena  in  which  the  other 
nations  of  Europe,  the  Spaniard,  the  Frenchman,  the  Swede,  the  Pole, 
and  the  Turk,  fought  out  their  diplomatic  and  military  struggles. 

The  Kaisertmn  was  but  one  of  the  Princes'  victims  ;  the  Burgertum 
also  fell  before  them.  The  vigorous  city  life  of  the  Middle  Ages  was 
a  thing  of  the  past  ;  in  many  a  German  town  the  representative  of 
the  territorial  sovereign  domineered  over  the  elect  of  the  burghers, 
interfered  in  their  administration,  and  even  controlled  their  finances. 
On  the  shores  of  the  Baltic  the  destruction  of  town  indej)endence  in- 
volved the  loss  of  Germany's  maritime  power,  and  not  till  our  own 
day  has  this  eclipse  begun  to  pass.  With  the  decay  of  civic  life  went 
also  the  ruin  of  municipal  arts  and  civilisation,  and  in  its  stead  there 
was  only  the  mainly  formal  culture  of  the  petty  German  Court.  No 
age  in  Germany  was  more  barren  of  intellectual  inspiration  than  that 
which  succeeded  the  Peace  of  Augsburg.  The  internecine  struggles 
of  the  reign  of  Charles  V  had  exhausted  all  classes  in  the  nation,  and 
an  era  of  universal  lassitude  followed  :  intellectually,  morally,  and  politi- 
cally, Germany  was  a  desert,  and  it  was  called  Religious  Peace. 


CHAPTER   IX 

THE  REFORMATION  IN  FRANCE 

The  Reformation  in  France  never  developed  into  a  national  move- 
ment. Though  the  Protestants  under  the  stress  of  persecution  con- 
solidated themselves  into  a  powerful  and  well-organised  party,  they 
never  formed  more  than  a  minority  of  the  nation.  The  majority, 
whose  attachment  to  the  Catholic  Church  was  stronger  than  their  desire 
for  her  reformation,  detested  the  Reformers  as  schismatics  and  separatists 
even  more  than  as  heretics.  When  the  Protestant  ranks  were  recruited 
by  the  accession  of  numerous  political  malcontents,  a  more  worldly 
leaven  pervaded  the  whole  cause  ;  the  principle  of  ^Dassive  resistance 
was  abandoned,  and  an  apjDeal  to  armed  force  became  inevitable.  The 
result  was  a  succession  of  religious  wars,  which  lasted,  though  not  con- 
tinuously, for  more  than  thirty  years.  It  was  not  till  the  beginning  of 
the  seventeenth  century  that  France,  once  more  at  peace  with  herself, 
was  able  to  work  out  on  her  own  lines  a  Counter-Reformation. 

Yet  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  nearly  all  enlightened 
men  were  agreed  as  to  the  necessity  for  Reform.  The  evils  under  which 
the  Church  in  France  laboured  were  those  which  prevailed  elsewhere  ; 
rapacity  and  worldliness  among  the  Bishops  and  abbots,  ignorance 
in  the  inferior  clergy,  great  relaxation  of  discipline,  and,  in  some 
cases,  positive  immorality  in  the  monasteries  and  nunneries  ;  and  as  the 
result  an  ever-widening  separation  between  religion  and  morality.  The 
first  of  these  evils  was  a  favourite  topic  with  the  popular  preachers  of 
Paris,  the  Franciscans,  Michel  Menot  and  Olivier  Maillard,  and  the 
Dominican,  Guillaume  Pepin.  On  the  other  hand,  the  everyday  story  of 
the  period  has  more  to  say  about  the  ignorance  of  the  parish  priests  and 
tlie  immorality  of  the  friars.  The  Franciscans  seem  to  have  been  espe- 
cially unpopular.  All  ranks  of  the  Church  alike  fell  under  the  lash  of 
Sebastian  Brant's  Sliip  of  Fools  and  Erasmus'  Praise  of  Folly,  both  of 
which  were  translated  into  French  and  widely  read. 

But  Frenchmen  can  relish  satire  even  of  what  they  love,  and  the 
people  were  none  the  less  sincere  in  their  attachment  to  the  Church 
because  they  applauded  the  sallies  of  the  jester.     This  attachment  was 

280 


Condition  of  the  Church  in  France  281 

all  the  stronger  because  it  sprang  as  much  from  a  national  as  from 
a  religious  feeling.  Ever  since  the  clays  of  Philip  the  Fair  France  had 
maintained  an  independent  attitude  towards  the  Papacy.  During  the 
Avignon  Captivity  the  Popes  had  been  her  obedient  servants.  At 
the  Council  of  Constance  it  was  two  Frenchmen,  Jean  Gerson  and 
Pierre  d'Ailly,  who  were  chiefly  instrumental  in  bringing  about  the 
declaration  that  Councils  are  superior  to  Popes.  The  Pragmatic 
Sanction  (1438),  as  has  been  related  in  the  first  volume,  gave  definite 
shape  to  the  liberties  of  the  Galilean  Church,  and,  though  during  the 
reigns  of  Louis  XI  and  Charles  VIII  it  was  more  or  less  in  abeyance, 
the  position  of  the  French  Church  towards  the  Papacy  remained 
practically  unaltered.  Louis  XII  formally  restored  the  Pragmatic  ;  and 
in  his  contest  with  Pope  Julius  II  skilfully  made  use  of  the  popular 
poet,  Pierre  Gringore,  to  influence  public  opinion.  In  his  famous 
tetralogy  of  Le  Jeu  du  Prince  des  Sots  et  Mere  Sotte^  played  at  Paris 
on  Shrove-Tuesday,  1511,  the  Pope  was  held  up  to  open  ridicule.  Thus 
in  France  there  were  no  motives  of  personal  interest  at  work  to  make  a 
revolt  from  Rome  desirable.  The  effect  of  the  Concordat,  the  sub- 
stitution of  which  for  the  Pragmatic  (1516)  was  the  only  reform  that 
the  Fifth  Lateran  Council  gave  to  France,  was  to  put  the  French  Church 
under  the  authority,  not  of  the  Pope,  but  of  the  King. 

But  the  change  in  the  method  of  appointing  Bishops  and  Abbots 
from  canonical  election  to  nomination  by  the  Crown,  which  was  the  chief 
feature  of  the  Concordat,  while  it  put  an  end  to  the  noisier  forms  of 
scandal  in  the  elections,  greatly  increased  what  many  regarded  as  the 
root  of  the  whole  evil,  the  non-residence  and  worldly  character  of  the 
superior  clergy.  For  Francis  I  found  that  the  patronage  of  some  six 
hundred  bishoprics  and  abbeys  furnished  him  with  a  convenient  and 
inexpensive  method  of  providing  for  his  diplomatic  service,  and  of 
rewarding  literary  merit.  A  large  number  of  abbeys  were  held  by 
laymen,  and  even  Bishops  were  not  always  in  orders  ;  pluralism  in  an 
aggravated  form  was  common ;  the  case  of  Cardinal  Jean  of  Lorraine 
has  been  noticed  in  an  earlier  chapter ;  his  brother  Cardinal,  Jean  du 
Bellay,  at  one  time  enjoyed  the  revenues  of  five  sees  and  fourteen 
abbeys.  Italians  shared  largely  in  the  royal  patronage,  and  in  1560 
it  was  estimated  that  they  held  one-third  of  all  the  benefices  in  the 
kingdom.  It  was  this  new  method  of  patronage  which  more  than  any- 
thing paralysed  all  attempts  at  reform.  It  was  idle  to  talk  of  reform  at 
the  bottom  when  at  the  top  every  personal  interest  was  bound  up  with 
the  existing  corruption. 

An  impulse  to  reform  was  clearly  needed  from  without.  This  was 
furnished  by  the  Renaissance.  For  it  was  inevitable  that  the  spirit  of 
free  enquiry,  which  was  the  main  characteristic  of  that  movement,  should 
also  invade  the  domain  of  religious  dogma  and  Church  institutions,  and 
that,  penetrating  here  as  elsewhere  to  the  sources,  it  should  apply  itself 


282  Lefevre  d'l^taples  and  Bvi^onnet  [i5i2-20 

to  the  first-hand  study  of  the  book  upon  which  dogma  and  institutions 
were  ultimately  based.  It  was  inevitable  also  that  the  spirit  of  individu- 
alism which  was  another  marked  characteristic  of  the  Renaissance  should 
end  in  questioning  the  right  of  the  Church  to  be  the  sole  interpreter  of 
that  book,  and  in  asserting  boldly  that  the  final  test  of  all  religion  is 
its  power  to  satisfy  the  needs  of  the  individual  soul. 

The  connexion  between  the  two  movements,  the  Renaissance  and  the 
Reformation,  was  especially  close  in  France.  In  both  alike  the  same 
man  occupied  an  almost  identical  position,  standing  on  a  threshold 
which  he  never  actually  crossed.  This  was  Jacques  Lefevre,  a  native  of 
Staples  in  Picardy  (Faber  Stapulensis).  After  taking  his  degree  in  Arts 
in  the  University  of  Paris,  he  studied  for  some  time  in  Italy  and  then 
devoted  himself  to  the  teaching  of  Aristotle  and  mathematics.  He  was 
also  a  busy  writer  and  edited  various  works,  including  Latin  translations 
of  most  of  Aristotle's  works.  Though  his  Latin  was  somewhat  bar- 
barous and  his  knowledge  of  Greek  imperfect,  his  services  were  warmly 
recognised  by  younger  scholars,  many  of  whom  were  his  pupils.  In  the 
year  1507,  when  he  was  about  fifty,  he  abandoned  secular  learning 
entirely  for  theology,  and  in  1512  published  a  Latin  translation  of  St 
Paul's  Epistles,  with  a  commentary.  The  book  was  remarkable  in  two 
ways  ;  first  because  a  revised  version  of  the  Vulgate  was  printed  by  the 
side  of  the  traditional  text,  and  secondly  because  it  anticipated  two  of  the 
cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  theolog3^  Thus  in  the  commentary  on 
the  First  Ej^istle  to  the  Corinthians  Lefevre  asserts  that  there  is  no  merit 
in  human  works  without  the  grace  of  God;  in  that  on  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  he  denies,  though  in  somewhat  less  precise  language,  the 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  while  admitting  the  Real  Presence. 

Lefevre  remained  some  years  after  the  publication  of  this  book  in 
the  seclusion  of  the  abbey  of  St  Germain-des-Pres  at  Paris,  where  his 
former  pupil,  Guillaume  Bri9onnet,  was  Abbot.  His  book,  though  it 
attracted  the  attention  of  the  learned,  passed  otherwise  unnoticed.  It 
was  not  till  1519  that  the  spark  which  he  had  kindled  was  fanned  into 
a  flame  by  the  dissemination  of  Luther's  Latin  writings,  which  were  read 
eagerly  at  Paris.  But  it  was  Brigonnet  who  first  put  his  hand  to  the 
practical  work  of  reforming  the  Church  in  France.  Appointed  to  the 
see  of  Meaux  in  1516  he  had,  after  an  absence  of  two  years  at  Rome  on 
a  special  mission,  returned  full  of  zeal  for  the  reformation  of  his  diocese. 
It  was  in  the  prosecution  of  this  design  that  towards  the  close  of  the 
year  1520  he  summoned  to  Meaux  his  old  tutor  Lefevre  and  certain  of 
his  friends  and  pupils,  all  noted  for  their  learning  and  piety,  and  all 
sharing  more  or  less  in  his  theological  views.  Among  them  were 
Francois  Vatable,  eminent  as  an  Hebrew  scholar,  Guillaume  Farel,  and 
Gerard  Roussel.  Another  member  of  the  grouj),  Michel  d'Arande,  was 
already  at  Meaux.  They  met  with  great  favour  from  the  Bishop,  and 
throughout  his  diocese  carried  on  the  work  of  "  preaching  Christ  from 


1520-5]       The  Meaux  preachers  and  the  Sorhonne  283 

the  sources  "  with  vigour  and  success.  The  movement  was  watched  with 
eager  sympatliy  by  the  King's  sister,  Margaret,  Duchess  of  AlenQon, 
who  had  chosen  the  Bisliop  for  her  spiritual  director  and  was  at  this 
time  carrying  on  with  him  a  voluminous  correspondence. 

In  June,  1523,  Lefevre  published  a  revised  French  translation  of  the 
four  Gospels,  the  first  instalment  of  a  new  translation  of  the  whole 
Bible,  which  he  had  been  urged  to  undertake  by  Margaret  and  her 
mother.  The  rest  of  the  New  Testament  followed  before  the  end  of  the 
year.  Except  in  a  few  passages  it  was  nothing  more  than  a  revision  of 
Jean  de  Rely's  Bible,  itself  almost  an  exact  reproduction  of  the  old 
thirteenth  century  translation  ;  but  its  publication  did  much  to  spread  the 
knowledge  of  the  New  Testament.  Though  the  effect  of  Luther's  writings 
in  France  was  considerable,  the  French  Reformers  showed  almost  from 
the  first  a  tendency  to  base  their  theology  rather  on  the  literary  inter- 
pretation of  the  Scriptures  than  on  the  specially  Lutheran  doctrine  of 
Justification  by  Faith.  Moreover,  the  geographical  position  of  P'rance 
brought  them  naturally  into  closer  relations  with  Bucer  and  Capito 
at  Strassburg,  and  with  CEcolampadius  at  Basel,  than  with  Luther  at 
Wittenberg. 

For  two  and  a  half  years  the  preaching  at  Meaux  went  on  without 
molestation  and  then  the  storm-clouds  began  to  gather.  Already  on 
April  15,  1521,  the  Faculty  of  Theology  of  the  Paris  University,  com- 
monly called  the  Sorbonne,  had  formally  condemned  Luther's  writings, 
and  on  August  3  of  the  same  year  the  Parliament  of  Paris  had  issued 
a  proclamation  that  all  those  who  had  any  of  these  writings  in  their 
possession  should  deliver  them  up  under  penalty  of  a  fine  or  imprison- 
ment. It  was  by  virtue  of  this  order  that  on  June  16, 1523,  the  books 
of  Louis  de  Berquin,  a  gentleman  of  Picardy,  noted  for  his  learning,  were 
seized,  examined,  and  censured  as  heretical.  On  October  15  the  Bishop 
of  Meaux,  whose  sole  desire  was  to  reform  the  Church  from  within,  and 
who  consequently  had  no  sympathy  with  Luther's  attitude  of  open  revolt, 
issued  two  synodal  decrees  :  one  against  the  doctrines  and  books  of 
Luther,  and  the  other  against  certain  heretical  opinions  which  had  been 
preached  in  his  diocese  touching  prayers  for  the  dead  and  the  invocation 
of  the  Saints.  The  latter  decree  was  probably  aimed  at  Farel,  whose 
fiery  and  logical  mind  had  carried  him  further  than  his  companions,  and 
who  had  left  Meaux  after  only  a  short  sojourn  to  become  the  leader  of 
an  advanced  section  of  the  movement  which  denied  the  Real  Presence 
and  shewed  generally  an  iconoclastic  and  uncompromising  spirit.  The 
other  preachers  were  still  protected  by  the  Bishop  in  spite  of  the  Paris 
Parliament.  However,  in  March,  1525,  an  example  was  made  in  the 
person  of  a  wool-carder,  named  Jean  Leclerc,  who  having  committed  a 
fanatical  outrage  was  whipped  and  branded,  first  at  Paris  and  then  at 
Meaux.     A  few  months  later  he  was  burnt  at  Metz  for  a  similar  offence. 

While  Francis  was  a  prisoner  at  Madrid  the  Queen-Mother,  urged 


28J:  Berquin  put  to  death  [1525-33 

by  her  first  minister,  Cardinal  Antoine  Duprat,  and  by  her  own  anxiety 
to  gain  the  support  of  the  Pope,  induced  the  Parliament  to  appoint  a 
commission  for  the  trial  of  Lutherans.  Many  persons  were  imprisoned  ; 
Lefevre's  translation  of  the  New  Testament  was  condemned  to  be  burned ; 
and  proceedings  were  instituted  against  the  Meaux  preachers.  They 
saved  themselves  by  flight,  finding  a  refuge  at  Strassburg  in  the  house  of 
Capito  (October,  1525).  In  January,  1526,  Berquin  was  imprisoned, 
and  on  February  17  a  young  bachelor  of  arts  named  Joubert  was  burnt 
at  Paris  for  holding  Lutheran  doctrines. 

On  March  17  Francis  returned  from  captivity ;  and  on  the  very  day 
of  his  arrival  in  France  he  sent  an  order  for  the  Parliament  to  suspend 
all  action  against  Berquin,  who  after  considerable  delay  was  set  at 
liberty.  Lefevre,  Roussel,  and  Arande,  who  still  called  themselves 
members  of  the  Catholic  Church,  were  recalled  from  exile,  and  Lefevre 
was  appointed  tutor  to  the  King's  third  son.  In  spite  of  the  execution 
of  Jacques  Pauvan,  one  of  the  Meaux  preachers  against  whom  proceedings 
had  been  taken  with  the  full  approval  of  the  King  (August  28,  1526), 
the  hopes  of  the  Reformers  began  to  rise ;  and,  on  the  whole,  up  to  the 
end  of  1527  things  seemed  to  be  taking  a  turn  in  their  favour.  But  on 
December  16  of  that  year  the  King,  being  in  straits  for  money  for  the 
ransom  of  his  sons,  summoned  an  Assembly  of  Notables;  and,  when 
representatives  of  the  clergy  accompanied  their  vote  of  1,300,000  livres 
with  a  request  that  he  would  take  measures  for  the  repression  of 
Lutheranism,  he  gave  a  ready  assent. 

An  outrage  on  a  statue  of  the  Virgin  at  Paris  (May  81,  1528) 
furnished  him  with  an  opportunity  of  proving  his  sincerity,  and  he  took 
part  in  a  magnificent  expiatory  procession.  Not  long  afterwards  Berquin 
was  again  brought  to  trial  and  found  guilty  of  heresy.  Francis  left  him 
to  his  fate,  and  he  was  burnt  on  April  17,  1529.  "  He  might  have 
been  the  Luther  of  France,"  says  Theodore  Beza,  "  had  Francis  been  a 
Frederick  of  Saxony."  Meanwhile  an  important  provincial  synod,  that 
of  Sens,  had  been  sitting  at  Paris  from  February  to  October  of  1528 
under  the  presidency  of  Cardinal  Duprat,  the  Archbishop  of  Sens,  for 
the  purpose  of  devising  measures  for  the  repression  of  heresy.  Similar 
synods  were  held  for  the  provinces  of  Bourges  and  Lyons. 

For  two  and  a  half  years  after  Berquin's  death  the  King  showed  no 
favour  to  the  Reformers.  But  in  the  autumn  of  1532  another  change 
in  his  religious  policy  began  to  make  itself  felt.  The  ever  shifting 
course  of  his  diplomacy  had  now  brought  him  into  a  closer  alliance  with 
Henry  VIII  and  into  relations  with  the  Protestant  Princes  of  Germany. 
It  was  perhaps  significant  of  this  change  that  Jean  du  Bellay  who,  like 
his  brother  Guillaume,  was  in  favour  of  a  moderate  reform  of  the 
Church,  was  at  this  time  appointed  Bishop  of  Paris.  During  the  whole 
of  Lent,  1533,  Gerard  Roussel,  at  the  instigation  of  Margaret,  now 
Queen  of  Navarre,  and  of  her  husband,  preached  daily  in  the  Louvre  to 


1533-4]  Vacillating  policy  of  Francis  I  285 

large  congregations  ;  and  when  Noel  Beda  and  some  other  doctors  of  the 
Sorbonne  ventured  to  accuse  the  King  and  Queen  of  heresy,  and  to  stir 
up  the  people  to  sedition,  Francis,  on  the  matter  being  reported  to  him, 
issued  from  Melun  an  edict  banishing  the  doctors  from  the  city.  The 
<^ueen  of  Navarre  became  in  consequence  highly  unpopular  with  the 
orthodox,  and,  in  a  comedy  played  by  the  students  of  the  College  of 
Navarre  on  October  1,  1533,  was  with  Roussel  held  up  to  ridicule  under 
a  thin  disguise. 

The  desire  of  the  King  for  the  Pope's  friendship  led  however  to  a 
fresh  change  of  religious  policy  ;  and,  as  the  result  of  the  conference  with 
Clement  at  Marseilles  (October  1 — November  12, 1533),  Francis,  while 
declining  to  join  in  a  general  crusade  against  the  followers  of  Luther  and 
Zwingli,  agreed  to  take  steps  for  the  suppression  of  heresy  in  his  own 
kingdom  and  received  from  the  Pope  a  Bull  for  that  purpose.  An 
opportunity  at  once  occurred  for  putting  it  into  force.  On  November  1 
the  new  Rector  of  the  University  of  Paris,  Nicolas  Cop,  in  his  customary 
Latin  oration,  enveloped  in  unmistakable  terms  the  doctrine  of  Justifi- 
cation by  Faith.  It  soon  became  known  that  this  discourse  had  been 
written  for  him  by  a  young  scholar  of  Picardy,  named  Jean  Cauvin,  or, 
as  he  called  himself,  Calvin.  The  scandal  was  great  ;  and  the  King  on 
hearing  of  it  immediately  wrote  to  the  Parliament  enjoining  it  to 
proceed  diligently  against  the  "  accursed  heretic  Lutheran  sect."  Within 
a  week  fifty  Lutherans  were  in  prison  ;  and  an  edict  was  issued  that 
anyone  convicted  by  two  witnesses  of  being  a  Lutheran  should  be  burned 
forthwith.  "  It  will  be  like  the  Spanish  Inquisition "  wrote  Martin 
Bucer. 

But  the  King's  Catholic  fever  quickly  cooled  down.  On  January  24, 
1534,  he  entered  into  a  secret  treaty  with  the  German  Protestant 
Princes  ;  and  when  he  returned  to  Paris  in  the  first  week  of  February  the 
persecutions  ceased.  Evangelical  doctrines  were  again  preached  in  the 
Louvre.  "  I  see  no  one  round  me  but  old  women,"  was  the  complaint  of 
a  Sorbonne  doctor  from  his  pulpit;  "all  the  men  go  to  the  Louvre." 
In  the  spring  Guillaume  du  Bellay  was  sent  for  the  second  time  on  a 
mission  to  Germany,  with  the  object  of  concerting  with  the  German 
theologians  some  via  media  which  should  effect  a  reconciliation  between 
the  two  religious  parties.  Accordingly  he  sent  a  request  to  Melanchthon 
to  draw  up  a  paper  embodying  suggestions  which  might  serve  as  the 
basis  for  an  oral  conference.  Melanchthon  complied,  and  du  Bellay 
returned  to  France  with  a  paper,  dated  August  1,  1534,  in  which 
the  various  points  in  dispute  were  separately  discussed  and  means  of 
arranging  them  were  suggested. 

But  these  hopes  of  reconciliation  were  suddenly  scattered  to  the 
winds  by  the  rash  act  of  some  of  the  more  fanatical  Reformers.  On  the 
morning  of  October  18,  1534,  the  inhabitants  of  Paris  awoke  to  find 
the  walls  of  all  the  principal  thoroughfares  placarded  with  a  broadside 


286  The  Placards  [1534-5 

in  which  the  Mass  and  its  celebrants  were  attacked  in  the  coarsest  and 
most  offensive  terms.  Copies  were  also  pasted  up  in  Orleans  and  other 
towns,  and  one  was  even  affixed  to  the  door  of  the  royal  bedchamber  at 
Amboise,  where  Francis  was  at  the  time  residing.  The  people  of  Paris 
were  thoroughly  roused  and  frightened  by  what  seemed  to  them  a 
blasphemous  outrage.  The  King  was  furious.  A  persecution  began  in 
Paris  which  far  exceeded  all  its  predecessors  in  rigour. 

By  the  middle  of  November  two  hundred  heretics  were  said  to  be  in 
prison ;  before  the  end  of  the  year  this  number  was  nearly  doubled. 
By  Christmas  eight  persons  had  been  burned.  Early  in  the  following 
year  (1535)  the  King  returned  to  Paris,  and  on  January  21  took  part  in 
a  grand  expiatory  procession.  This  was  followed  by  a  public  banquet^ 
at  which  he  made  a  long  speech  announcing  once  more  his  intention  of 
exterminating  heresy  from  his  kingdom.  The  day  of  expiation  closed 
with  the  burning  of  six  more  heretics.  On  January  25  seventy-three 
Lutherans,  who  had  fled  from  Paris,  were  summoned  by  the  town  crier 
to  appear  before  the  Courts,  or  in  default  to  suffer  attainder  and  con- 
fiscation of  their  goods.  Among  these  was  the  educational  reformer, 
Mathurin  Cordier,  and  the  poet,  Clement  Marot.  By  May  5  there 
were  nine  more  executions,  making  in  all  twenty-three.  But  the  King 
was  beginning  to  relent.  On  the  death  of  the  Chancellor,  Cardinal 
Duprat  (July  9),  Francis  appointed  in  his  place  Antoine  du  Bourg, 
who  was  favourable  to  the  Reformers.  On  July  16  he  issued  an  Edict 
from  Coucy  announcing  that  there  were  to  be  no  further  prosecutions 
except  in  the  case  of  Sacramentarians  and  relapsed  persons,  and  that  all 
fugitives  who  returned  and  abjured  their  errors  within  six  months  should 
receive  pardon.  The  reason  for  this  milder  attitude  was  that  Francis 
was  still  angling  for  an  alliance  with  the  German  Protestant  Princes, 
and  had  renewed  the  negotiations  with  Melanchthon.  By  the  direction 
of  Guillaume  du  Bellay,  John  Sturm,  who  held  at  this  time  a  professorship 
at  Paris,  wrote  both  to  Melanchthon  and  Bucer  urging  them  to  come  to 
France  for  the  purpose  of  a  conference  with  the  Paris  theologians. 
Melanchthon  consented  ;  but  the  Elector  John  Frederick  of  Saxony 
refused  to  let  him  go,  and  the  proposed  conference  had  to  be  abandoned 
(August,  1535).  At  the  same  time  the  Sorbonne,  to  whom  Melanch- 
thon's  paper  of  the  preceding  year  had  been  submitted,  expressed  its 
entire  disapproval  of  the  project. 

Bucer,  however,  still  worked  indefatigably  on  behalf  of  a  reconcilia- 
tion ;  and  at  the  close  of  the  year  du  Bellay  was  again  in  Germany,  first 
assuring  the  diet  of  Protestant  Princes  assembled  at  Schmalkalden  that 
his  royal  master  had  not  burnt  his  Lutheran  subjects  from  any  dislike  of 
their  religious  opinions,  and  then  holding  interviews  with  Melanchthon, 
Sturm,  and  others,  in  which  he  represented  his  master's  theological  views 
as  differing  not  greatly  from  their  own.  It  was  all  to  no  purpose.  Princes 
and  theologians  alike  had  ceased  to  believe  in  the  French  King's  sincerity. 


1536]  The  Cliristianae  religionis  institutio  287 

Neither  the  Edict  of  Coucy,  nor  a  similar  Edict,  somewhat  more 
liberal,  which  was  issued  in  May,  1536,  had  much  effect  in  bringing  back 
the  exiles  to  France.  The  great  majority  perferred  exile  to  abjuration. 
Thus  while  the  cause  of  Protestantism  in  France  lost  in  this  way  many  of 
its  most  ardent  supporters,  on  the  other  hand  there  fell  away  from  it  the 
timid  and  the  interested,  those  who  had  no  wish  "  to  be  burned  like  red 
herrings, "  and  those  who  basked  in  the  sunsliine  of  the  royal  favour. 
Moreover  the  sympathies  of  moderate  men,  of  men  like  Guillaume  and 
Jean  du  Bellay,  of  Guillaume  Bude  and  Frangois  Rabelais,  were  alienated 
by  the  iconoclastic  outbursts  of  the  Reformers.  They  were  favourable 
to  a  reform  of  the  Church  by  moderate  means,  but  they  were  statesmen 
or  humanists,  and  not  theologians.  Rabelais'  Gargantua^  which  he 
must  have  finished  just  before  the  affair  of  the  placards,  contains  several 
passages  of  a  distinctly  evangelical  character.  But  in  his  later  books  we 
find  him  "throwing  stones  into  the  Protestant  garden."  Lastly,  there 
was  a  small  group  who  followed  the  example  of  the  Queen  of  Navarre 
and  her  ally  Gerard  Roussel,  now  Bishop  of  Oloron,  and,  while  still 
holding  the  chief  evangelical  doctrines,  continued  members  of  the 
Catholic  Church  and  conformed  to  most  of  its  ceremonial.  Though 
this  seemed  to  Calvin  an  unworthy  compromise,  it  fairly  represented  the 
half-practical,  half-mystical  character  of  Margaret's  religion  and  her 
adherence  to  a  certain  phase  of  the  Renaissance. 

Thus  the  affair  of  the  placards  and  the  resulting  persecution  had 
made  too  wide  a  breach  between  the  two  religious  parties  to  admit  of 
its  being  healed.  Partly  from  the  timidity  of  the  leaders  and  partly 
from  the  rashness  of  the  rank  and  file,  the  first  or  Evangelical  phase 
of  Protestantism  in  France  had  failed  to  bring  about  a  reform  of  the 
Church.  In  the  early  part  of  the  year  1536  the  man,  who  had  ini- 
tiated the  movement,  the  aged  Lefevre  d'Etaples,  died  at  N^rac.  Almost 
simultaneously  there  appeared  a  work  which  was  to  inaugurate  the 
second  or  Calvinistic  phase  of  French  Protestantism,  Calvin's  Christianae 
religionis  institutio  (March,  1536).  Though  little  more  than  a  sketch  as 
compared  with  the  form  which  it  finally  took,  it  was  in  essential  points 
complete.  It  gave  the  French  Reformers  what  tliey  so  greatly  needed,  a 
definite  theological  system  in  place  of  the  undogmatic  and  mainly  practical 
teaching  of  Lefevre  and  Roussel.  It  gave  them  a  profession  of  faith 
which  might  serve  at  once  to  unite  their  own  forces  and  to  prove  to  their 
persecutors  the  righteousness  of  their  cause. 

It  is  true  that  French  Protestantism,  in  thus  becoming  Calvinistic,  in 
a  large  measure  abandoned  the  two  leading  principles  of  the  movement 
out  of  which  it  had  sprung,  the  spirit  of  free  enquiry,  and  the  spirit  of 
individualism.  But  without  this  surrender  it  must  in  the  long  run  have 
yielded  to  persecution.  It  was  only  by  cohesion  that  it  could  build  up 
the  necessary  strength  for  resistance.  Thus  the  French  Protestants 
hailed  the  author  of  the  Listitutio  as  their  natural  leader,  as  the  organiser 


288        Vigorous  measures  against  the  Protestants     [1536-44 

of  their  scattered  forces.  Little  wonder  if  during  the  next  twenty-five 
years  of  their  direst  need  they  looked  for  consolation  and  support  to 
the  free  city  among  the  Alj)s  and  to  the  strong  man  who  ruled  it. 

The  new  war  with  Charles  V,  which  broke  out  in  April,  1536,  left  the 
French  King  no  leisure  for  the  suppression  of  heresy.  But  after  the  truce 
at  Nice  and  the  interview  with  the  Emperor  at  Aigues-Mortes  (July  14, 
1538)  Francis  began  to  address  himself  in  earnest  to  his  task.  After  two 
partial  Edicts,  the  first  addressed  to  the  Parliament  of  Toulouse 
(December  16,  1538),  and  the  second  to  the  Parliaments  of  Toulouse, 
Bordeaux,  and  Rouen  (June  24,1539),  he  issued  from  Fontainebleau  on 
June  1,  1540,  a  general  Edict  of  great  severity.  It  introduced  a  more 
efficient  and  rapid  procedure  for  the  trial  of  heretics,  which,  with  a 
slight  modification  made  by  the  Edict  of  Paris  (July  23, 1543),  enlarging 
the  powers  of  the  ecclesiastical  Courts,  remained  in  force  for  the  next 
nine  years.  On  August  29,  1542,  another  Edict  was  addressed  to  the 
Parliament  of  Toulouse,  followed  on  the  next  day  by  a  mandamus  to 
those  of  Paris,  Bordeaux,  Dijon,  Grenoble,  and  Rouen.  The  Parliament 
of  Aix  required  no  such  stimulus.  Meanwhile  the  Sorbonne  had  been 
engaged  in  drawing  up  twenty-six  articles  in  which  the  true  Catholic 
faith  on  all  the  disputed  points  was  set  forth.  It  was  their  answer  to 
the  French  translation  of  the  Institutio  which  Calvin  had  completed  in 
1541  from  the  second  and  greatly  enlarged  Latin  edition.  The  articles 
were  ratified  by  a  royal  Ordinance  of  July  23,  1543.  The  answer  of  the 
Parliament  of  Paris  had  been  of  a  more  material  character.  On  July  1, 
1542,  it  issued  a  long  Edict  concerning  the  supervision  of  the  press,  of 
which  the  first  clause  ordered  all  copies  of  the  Institutio  to  be  given  up 
within  twenty -four  hours.  On  February  14,  1544,  these^were  solemnly 
burnt,  with  other  books,  including  several  printed  by  Etienne  Dolet. 
This  was  shortly  followed  by  the  publication  of  the  first  Index  Expurga- 
torius  issued  by  the  Sorbonne,  which  was  registered  by  the  Parliament  ten 
months  later. 

In  this  policy  of  repression  the  King  had  the  active  support  of  four 
men  ;  the  Inquisitor-General,  Matthieu  Ory  ;  the  first  President  of  the 
Parliament  of  Paris,  Pierre  Lizet,  soon  to  become  even  more  notorious 
as  the  President  of  the  Ohambre  Ardente ;  the  Chancellor,  Guillaume 
Poyet,  who  had  succeeded  the  moderate  Antoine  du  Bourg  on  November 
12,  1538  ;  and  foremost  among  them,  the  Cardinal  de  Tournon,  now  all 
powerful  with  the  King,  and  practically  his  first  minister.  Though  the 
Cardinal  was  a  liberal  patron  of  learning  and  letters,  he  was  a  relentless 
and  untiring  foe  to  the  new  religious  doctrines.  "  He  is  worth  to  France 
an  Inquisition  in  himself,"  said  a  contemporary.  It  is  significant  also  that 
just  at  this  time  Francis  lost  one  of  his  ablest  and  most  enlightened 
ministers,  and  the  French  Reformers  one  of  their  best  friends  in 
Guillaume  du  Bellay,  who  died  in  January,  1543. 

With  such  a  man  in  power  as  the  Cardinal  de  Tournon  there  was  not 


1544-5]  llie  Massacre  of  the  Waldenses  289 

likely  to  be  any  slackness  in  the  execution  of  the  Edicts.  The  earlier 
half  of  the  year  1541  was  a  period,  of  special  distress  for  the  French 
Reformers ;  and  throughout  the  years  1540  to  1544  constant  additions 
were  made  to  the  roll  of  their  martyrs.  It  is  chiefly  of  isolated  cases 
that  we  hear,  at  most  of  three  or  four  at  a  time  ;  there  were  no  autos-de-fS. 
The  stress  of  persecution  had  compelled  the  Reformers  to  practise 
prudence  and  secrecy,  but  each  fresh  execution  added  strength  to  the 
cause.     One  martyr  made  many  converts. 

The  Peace  of  Crepy,  September  18,  1544,  with  its  vague  provisions 
for  the  reunion  of  religion,  and  "  for  the  prevention  of  the  extreme 
danger  "  which  threatened  it,  boded  evil  to  the  Reformers.  The  next 
year,  1545,  memorable  as  the  year  in  which  the  Council  of  Trent  held 
its  first  sitting,  is  also  memorable  for  an  act  which  has  left  a  dark  stain 
on  the  history  of  France  and  the  Church,  the  massacre  of  the  Waldenses 
of  Provence.  In  1530  these  peaceful  followers  of  Peter  Waldo,  who 
dwelt  in  about  thirty  villages  along  the  Durance,  having  heard  of 
the  religious  doctrines  that  were  being  preached  in  Germany  and 
Switzerland,  sent  two  envoys  to  some  of  the  leading  Reformers  to  lay 
before  them  their  own  tenets,  and  to  submit  to  them  forty-seven  questions 
on  which  they  were  desirous  of  instruction.  They  received  long  answers 
from  fficolampadius  and  Bucer,  and  in  consequence  held  in  September, 
1532,  a  conference  of  their  ministers  at  Angrogne  in  Piedmont,  at  wiiich 
they  drew  up  a  confession  of  faith  chiefly  based  on  the  replies  of  the  two 
Reformers.  They  also  agreed  to  contribute  five  hundred  gold  crowns 
to  the  printing  of  the  new  French  translation  of  the  Scriptures  which 
was  in  contemplation.  This  affiliation  of  their  sect  to  the  Lutheran 
heresy  naturally  attracted  the  attention  of  the  ecclesiastical  authorities. 
Accordingly  Jean  de  Roma,  the  Inquisitor  of  the  Faith  for  Provence,  who 
had  already  begun  to  exhort  the  Waldenses  to  abjure  their  heresy,  set  on 
foot  a  cruel  persecution. 

The  unfortunate  Waldenses  appealed  to  the  King,  who  sent 
commissioners  to  investigate  the  matter.  Roma  was  condemned,  but 
escaped  punishment  by  flight  to  Avignon  (1533)  ;  and  the  Waldenses, 
profiting  by  the  comparative  favour  that  was  shown  to  the  Reformers 
at  this  time,  considerably  increased  in  number.  But  in  1535  the 
Archbishop  and  Parliament  of  Aix  renewed  the  persecution,  and  on 
November  18,  1540,  the  Parliament  issued  an  order,  afterwards  known 
as  the  Arret  de  Merindol,  by  which  seventeen  inhabitants  of  Merindol 
and  the  neighbourhood,  who  had  been  summoned  before  the  bar  of 
Parliament  and  had  failed  to  appear,  were  sentenced  to  be  burned. 
Owing  however  to  the  action  of  the  First  President  the  order  was  not 
put  into  immediate  execution ;  and,  the  matter  having  come  to  the  King's 
ears,  he  ordered  Guillaume  du  Bellay,  his  Lieutenant-General  in  Piedmont, 
to  make  an  enquiry  into  the  character  and  religious  opinions  of  the 
Waldenses.     As  the  result  of  this  enquiry  the  King  granted  a  pardon  to 

C.     M.    H.     II.  19 


290  Execution  of  the  Fourteen  of  Meaux  [i546 

the  condemned,  provided  that  they  abjured  their  errors  within  three  months 
(February  8, 15-11) .  The  order  was  still  suspended  over  their  heads  when 
at  the  close  of  1543  Jean  Meynier,  Seigneur  d'Oppede,  a  man  of  brutal 
ferocity,  succeeded  to  the  office  of  First  President  of  the  Parliament 
of  Aix.  The  Waldenses  again  appealed  to  the  King  and  were  again 
protected  (1544).  Accordingly  the  Parliament  despatched  a  messenger 
to  the  King  with  the  false  statement  that  the  people  of  Merindol  were  in 
open  rebellion  and  were  even  threatening  Marseilles.  With  the  help  of 
the  Cardinal  de  Tournon  they  obtained  upon  this  statement  new  letters- 
patent  from  the  King  revoking  his  former  letters,  and  ordering  that  all 
who  were  found  guilty  of  the  Waldensian  heresy  should  be  exterminated 
(Januarj^  1, 1545).  The  decree  was  kept  secret  until  an  army  had  been 
collected ;  and  then,  on  April  12,  Oppede,  who,  in  the  absence  of  the 
Governor  of  Provence  was  acting  as  his  deputy,  called  together  the 
Parliament,  read  the  decree,  and  appointed  four  commissioners  to  carry 
it  into  execution.  Within  a  week  Merindol,  Cabrieres,  and  other  villages 
were  in  ashes  ;  and  at  Cabrieres  alone  eight  hundred  persons,  including 
women  and  children,  are  said  to  have  been  put  to  death.  The  work 
of  destruction  continued  for  nearly  two  months,  and  in  the  end  it  was 
computed  that  three  thousand  men,  women,  and  children  had  been 
killed,  and  twenty-two  villages  burned,  while  the  flower  of  the  men  were 
sent  to  the  galleys.  Many  of  the  survivors  fled  the  country  to  find  a 
refuge  in  Switzerland. 

If  the  execution  of  the  "  Fourteen  of  Meaux  "  falls  far  short  of  the 
massacre  of  the  Vaudois  as  regards  the  number  of  its  victims,  its  strictly 
judicial  character  iiiakes  it  more  instructive  as  an  example  of  the  treat- 
ment of  heretics.  In  the  year  1546  the  Reformers  of  Meaux  organised 
themselves  into  a  Church  after  the  pattern  of  that  set  up  by  the  French 
refugees  at  Strassburg  eight  years  before.  They  chose  as  their  first 
pastor,  a  wool-carder,  named  Pierre  Leclerc,  a  brother  of  the  man  who 
was  burnt  at  Metz.  Their  number  increased  under  his  ministry,  and  the 
matter  soon  came  to  the  ear  of  the  authorities.  On  September  8  a 
sudden  descent  was  made  on  the  congregation,  and  sixty  persons  were 
arrested  and  sent  to  Paris  to  be  tried  by  the  Parliament.  Their  greatest 
crime  was  that  they  had  celebrated  the  Holy  Communion.  On  October  4 
sentence  was  pronounced.  Fourteen  were  sentenced  to  be  tortured  and 
burned,  five  to  be  flogged  and  banished;  ten,  all  women,  were  set  free, 
while  the  remainder  were  to  undergo  graduated  forms  of  penance.  The 
sentences  were  carried  out  at  Meaux  on  October  7.  Etienne  Mangin,  in 
whose  house  the  services  had  always  been  lield,  and  Leclerc,  were  carried 
to  the  stake  on  hurdles,  the  rest  on  tumbrils.  They  had  all  previously 
undergone  what  was  known  as  "  extraordinary  "  torture,  and  all  had 
refused  to  reveal  the  names  of  other  Reformers  at  Meaux.  At  the  stake 
six  yielded  so  far  as  to  confess  to  a  priest,  thereby  escaping  the  penalty 
of  having  their  tongues  cut  out ;  the  others  who  remained  firm  suffered 


Results  of  the  policy  of  Francis  I  291 

this  additional  barbarity,  which  it  was  the  custom  to  inflict  on  those 
who  died  impenitent.  The  congregation  at  Meaux  was  thus  broken 
up,  but  tlie  survivors  carried  the  evangelical  seeds  to  other  towns  in 
France. 

The  "  Fourteen  of  Meaux  "  were  not  the  only  victims  of  the  year 
1546.  Five  others  had  already  been  burned  at  Paris,  including  the 
scholar  and  printer  Etienne  Dolet.  Others  were  burned  in  the  provinces. 
The  next  year,  1547,  opened  with  fresh  executions ;  and  on  January  14 
the  mutilation  of  a  statue  of  the  Virgin  was  expiated  by  a  solemn 
procession  at  Paris. 

Such  was  the  policy  which  Francis  I  began  definitely  to  adopt  towards 
Protestantism  after  the  affair  of  the  placards,  and  which  he  put  into  active 
execution  during  the  last  seven  years  of  his  life.  How  far  was  it  suc- 
cessful ?  As  we  have  seen,  it  drove  a  large  number  of  persons  into  exile  ; 
and  these  consisted  chiefly  of  the  better-born  and  better-educated  among 
the  Reformers.  It  intimidated  many  into  outward  conformity  with  the 
Church.  It  prevented  all  public  exercise  of  the  Reformed  religion,  and 
all  open  propaganda.  Religious  meetings  were  held  by  night  or  in 
cellars ;  doctrines  were  spread  by  secret  house-to-house  teaching,  or  by 
treatises  concealed  amongst  the  wares  of  pretended  pedlars.  On  the 
other  hand  the  frequent  executions  helped  to  spread  the  evil  they 
were  meant  to  repress.  The  firm  courage  with  which  the  victims  faced 
death  did  as  much  as  the  purity  of  their  lives  to  convert  others  to  their 
faith.  Moreover,  the  influence  of  the  exiles  reacted  on  their  old  homes. 
From  Geneva  and  the  other  Swiss  centres  of  Protestantism  missionaries 
came  to  evangelise  France. 

The  result  was  that  there  was  no  longer  a  province  in  France,  except 
Britanny,  in  which  Protestantism  had  not  acquired  a  foothold.  In  all  the 
large  towns  it  had  been  established  at  an  early  date.  In  Lj'ons,  the  most 
enlightened  town  of  France,  the  Lutherans  were  already  described  in 
1524  as  "  swarming."  At  Bordeaux,  where  the  first  seed  had  been  sown 
by  Farel,  the  preaching  of  a  Franciscan,  Thomas  Illyricus,  in  1526,  had 
produced  a  rich  harvest ;  and  the  revival  in  1532  of  the  old  College  of 
Arts  under  the  name  of  the  College  of  Guyenne  had  done  much  to 
foster  the  movement.  Rouen  was  deeply  infected  in  1531  and  thence 
the  contagion  spread  to  other  parts  of  Normandy  and  to  Amiens  in 
Picardy.  Orleans  became  an  important  centre,  partly  through  the 
influence  of  Melchior  Wolmar,  who  lived  there  from  1528  to  the  end  of 
1530.  Even  at  Toulouse,  where  the  University  had  been  founded  as 
a  bulwark  of  orthodoxy,  and  on  the  whole  had  fully  maintained  its 
reputation,  the  new  doctrines  could  not  be  kept  out,  and  in  1532  Jean 
de  Caturce,  a  young  licentiate  of  laws,  was  burned  at  the  stake. 

Other  Universities  contributed  to  the  spread  of  Evangelical  teaching: 
Poitiers,  Angers,  Bourges,  and  especially  Nismes,  the  new  foundation  of 
Margaret  of  Navarre,  the  rector  of  which  was  the  well-known  humanist 


292  Spy^ead  of  Protestantism. — Henry  II  [1547 

Claude  Baduel,  an  avowed  Protestant.  At  Poitiers  one  of  the  professors 
of  theology,  Charles  de  Sainte  Marthe,  openly  taught  the  new  doctrines 
till,  a  persecution  breaking  out  in  1537,  he  had  to  fly  for  his  life. 
Protestantism  was  also  rife  at  Loudun  and  Fontenay,  and  before  long 
spread  to  Niort  and  La  Rochelle.  Poitou  became  the  stronghold  of 
French  Protestantism.  Other  provinces  to  which  it  gained  admission  at 
an  early  date  were  Dauphine,  where  Farel  had  preached  in  1522,  and 
the  Vivarais,  in  which  Annonay  near  the  Rhone  became  an  important 
centre. 

As  was  natural,  the  water-ways  of  the  great  rivers  helped  to  spread 
the  movement.  On  the  Loire  there  was  hardly  a  town  from  Le  Puy  to 
Angers  which  it  did  not  reach,  while  between  Orleans  and  Tours  it  took 
a  firm  hold.  It  worked  up  the  Sarthe  to  Le  Mans  and  Alengon,  and  up 
the  Allier  to  Moulins  and  Issoire.  It  penetrated  the  Limousin  by  the 
Vienne  and  La  IVIarche  by  the  Creuse.  It  made  its  way  along  the  Seine 
from  Rouen  to  Troyes  and  along  the  Yonne  to  Sens  and  Auxerre.  From 
Lyons  it  travelled  down  the  Rhone  to  Tournon,  and  up  the  Saone  to 
M^con  and  Chalons.  At  Dijon,  the  old  capital  of  the  duchy  of  Bur- 
gundy, a  Lutheran  was  executed  in  1530,  and  soon  afterwards  a  pastor 
was  sent  there  from  Geneva.  Agen  on  the  Garonne  formed  a  connecting 
link  between  Bordeaux  and  Toulouse  ;  Sainte  Foy  and  Bergerac  were 
reached  by  the  Dordogne,  and  Villeneuve  by  the  Lot.  The  preaching 
of  Philibert  Hamelin  at  Saintes  has  been  described  in  a  well-known 
passage  by  his  fellow-Protestant  Bernard  Palissy  ;  thence  it  spread  up 
the  Charente  to  Cognac  and  Angouleme. 

This  then  was  the  result  of  the  repressive  policy  which  Francis  I  had 
carried  out  with  more  or  less  consistency  for  ten  years.  The  outward 
manifestation  of  Protestantism  was  indeed  kept  under,  though  not 
without  difficulty ;  but  the  work  of  propagandism  went  on  in  secret, 
until  nearly  the  whole  of  France  was  covered  with  a  network  of  posts 
which,  insignificant  enough  at  present,  were  ready  at  a  favourable 
opportunity  and  with  proper  organisation  to  become  active  centres  of  a 
militant  Protestantism.  But  a  change  was  now  impending  in  the 
government  of  France.  At  the  end  of  January,  1517,  Francis  I  was 
seized  with  a  serious  illness,  which  terminated  fatally  on  the  31st  of 
March.  He  was  succeeded  by  his  onlj^  surviving  son,  under  the  title  of 
Henry  II. 

Henry's  policy  towards  the  Protestants  from  the  first  was  far  more 
uniformly  rigorous  than  his  father's.  It  was  not  biassed  either  by 
sympathy  with  humanism,  or  by  the  necessity  of  conciliating  his 
Protestant  allies.  Moreover  it  was  the  one  point  of  policy  upon  which 
all  his  advisers  were  agreed.  Here  the  opposing  influences  of  Mont- 
morency and  Guise  united  in  a  common  aim.  In  the  very  first  year 
of  his  reign  a  second  criminal  Court  of  the  Parliament  of  Paris  was 


1549-58]   La  Cliambre  Ardente. — Protestant  advance     293 

created  for  the  trial  of  heretics  (October  8, 1547).  It  became  known  as 
la  Chambre  Ardente,  and  full}^  deserved  its  name.  From  the  beginning 
of  December,  1547,  to  January  10,  1550,  it  must  have  condemned  to 
death  at  least  a  hundred  persons,  belonging  for  the  most  part  to  the 
class  of  smaller  shopkeepers  and  artisans,  and  that  although  its  juris- 
diction was  confined  to  a  quarter  of  France.  The  provincial  Parliaments, 
especially  those  of  Rouen,  Toulouse,  and  Aix,  were  no  less  active. 
Owing  to  the  jealousy  of  the  ecclesiastical  Courts  the  sole  right  of 
trying  cases  of  heresy  was  restored  to  them  by  an  Edict  of  November  19, 
1549,  and  the  Chmnhre  Ardente  was  temporarily  suppressed.  But  the 
ecclesiastical  Courts  continued  to  show  remissness  ;  and  a  new  Edict  was 
issued  from  Chateaubriand  on  June  27, 1551.  It  transferred  to  the  civil 
Courts  the  cognisance  of  heretical  acts  which  involved  a  public  scandal  or 
disturbance,  and  encouraged  informers  by  the  promise  of  a  third  of  the 
accused's  property.  Fresh  executions  in  various  parts  of  France  showed 
that  the  judges  were  more  to  be  relied  on  than  the  Bishops.  In  March, 
1553,  the  Cliambre  Ardente  was  revived,  and  soon  afterwards  an  execution 
took  place  at  Lyons  which  made  a  deep  impression  on  the  public  mind. 
It  was  that  of  the  "  Five  Scholars  of  Lausanne."  Natives  of  different 
places  in  the  south-west  of  France,  they  had  gone  to  Lausanne  to 
prepare  themselves  by  study  for  the  work  of  evangelisation.  One  had 
lodged  with  Beza,  another  with  Viret.  On  their  return  home  they 
were  arrested  at  Lyons  (May  1,  1552)  and  condemned  to  death  for 
heresy  by  the  ecclesiastical  judge.  Having  appealed  to  the  Parliament 
of  Paris,  they  were  kept  for  a  whole  year  in  prison  awaiting  its 
decision.  Beza,  Pierre  Viret,  the  Cantons  of  Zurich  and  Bern,  interceded 
in  vain  with  the  King  and  with  the  Cardinal  of  Tournon.  The 
scholars  were  burnt  on  May  16,  1553.  They  had  been  guilty  of  no 
crime  except  that  of  heretical  opinions  ;  they  had  committed  no  act 
which  could  possibly  be  construed  as  dangerous  to  the  public  peace 
or  to  the  orthodox  religion .  Their  execution  made  a  deep  impression, 
and  the  account  of  it  fills  a  large  space  in  Crespin's  Martyrology 
which  appeared  in  the  following  year  (1554),  and  immediately  took  rank 
with  the  Protestant  Bible  and  the  Protestant  Psalter  as  a  cherished 
source  of  inspiration  and  support  in  persecution. 

In  the  year  1555  French  Protestantism  took  a  definite  step  forwards. 
It  began  to  organise  its  Churches.  It  is  true  that  before  this  date 
Churches  had  been  established  at  Meaux  (1546)  and  Nismes  (154.7),  but 
they  had  both  been  broken  up  by  persecution.  Now  Paris  set  the 
example.  The  Church  was  organised,  as  that  of  Meaux  had  been,  on 
the  model  of  that  of  Strassburg,  founded  by  Calvin  in  1538.  Jean  le 
Magon,  surnamed  Le  Riviere,  was  chosen  as  pastor,  and  he  was  assisted 
in  the  work  of  government  by  a  consistory  of  elders  and  deacons.  In 
the  same  year  Churches  were  organised  after  the  same  pattern  at  Angers, 
Poitiers,  and  Loudun,  and  in  the  little  peninsula  of  Arvert,  between 


294  Protestant  Churches  organised. — Fresh  persecution  [1555-8 

the  Gironcle  and  the  Seuclre.  In  the  following  year  (1556)  were  added 
Blois  and  Montoire  in  the  Orleanais  ;  Bourges,  Issoudun,  and  Aubigny 
in  Berry  ;  and  Tours  ;  while  the  Church  of  Meaux  was  refounded  in  the 
same  year.  The  Churches  of  Orleans  and  Rouen  date  from  1557,  and 
as  many  as  twenty  were  established  in  1558,  including  Dieppe,  Troyes, 
Bordeaux,  La  Rochelle,  Toulouse,  and  liennes.  This  important  work 
was  due  largely  to  the  instigation  of  Calvin,  and  was  carried  out  under 
his  supervision.  During  the  eleven  years  from  1555  to  1566  no  less 
than  120  pastors  were  sent  from  Geneva  to  France.  Geneva  was  in  fact 
now  regarded  as  the  capital  of  French  Protestantism  ;  French  refugees 
had  gone  there  in  increasing  numbers,  and  had  contributed  to  Calvin's 
definite  triumph  over  his  opponents  in  the  very  year,  1555,  in  which  the 
French  Churches  began  to  be  organised. 

Meanwhile  the  French  government  was  devising  a  more  powerful 
engine  for  the  suppression  of  Protestantism.  At  the  instance  of  the 
Cardinal  of  Lorraine  Edicts  were  drawn  up  establishing  an  Inquisition 
after  the  Spanish  pattern.  They  were  submitted  to  the  Parliament  of 
Paris  early  in  the  year  1555,  but  the  Parliament  refused  to  register  them, 
and  when  Pierre  Seguier,  one  of  the  presidents  a  7nortier,  appeared  before 
the  King  to  justify  its  action  (October  22,  1555)  he  spoke  with  such 
convincing  eloquence  that  the  matter  was  dropped  for  a  time.  But  in 
1557  Henry,  finding  the  existing  machinery  for  the  suppression  of 
heresy  still  insufficient,  obtained  a  papal  brief  authorising  the  proposed 
step.  To  this  was  joined  a  dij)loma  appointing  the  Cardinals  of 
Lorraine,  Bourbon,  and  Chatillon  as  Inquisitors-General  (April  25,1557). 
As,  however,  the  Parliament  refused  to  recognise  it,  the  brief  remained 
inoperative,  and  the  King  had  to  content  himself  with  a  new  Edict 
against  heresy  which  was  issued  from  Compiegne  on  July  24. 

Before  it  was  registered  (January  15, 1558)  a  fresh  persecution  broke 
out.  The  defeat  of  St  Quentin  (August  10)  had  thrown  Paris  into  a 
paroxysm  of  unreasoning  terror,  wliich  was  repeated  on  the  news  of  the 
surrender  of  the  town  (August  27).  On  the  evening  of  September  4 
a  congregation  of  three  or  four  hundred  Protestants,  which  had  assembled 
for  worship  in  a  large  house  in  the  Rue  St  Jacques,  was  attacked  by 
a  furious  mob.  The  majority  of  the  men,  many  of  whom  were  armed, 
forced  their  way  out,  but  the  rest  remained  in  the  building  till  the 
arrival  of  a  magistrate  and  an  armed  force,  when  they  were  carried  off  to 
prison.  As  a  result  of  the  investigations  which  followed,  seven  persons, 
including  a  young  married  lady  of  rank,  were  burned.  There  were  also 
some  high-born  ladies  among  those  prisoners  who  were  eventually  re- 
leased- The  fact  is  significant.  During  the  last  few  years  Protestantism, 
which  at  first  affected  mainly  the  artisan  class,  had  begun  to  spread 
among  the  higher  ranks  of  society,  and  it  now  received  some  notable 
accessions.  Francois  d'Andelot,  the  youngest  of  the  Chatillon  brothers, 
became  a  Protestant  during  his  imprisonment  at  Melun  (1551-6),  and 


1558-9]  The  great  Protestant  Synod  295 

the  imprisonment  of  Gaspard  de  Coligny  after  the  fall  of  St  Queutin 
had  the  same  result.  About  the  same  time  Antoine  de  Bourbon,  the 
titular  King  of  Navarre,  who  was  the  next  in  succession  to  King  Henry  II 
and  his  sons,  joined  the  ranks  of  the  Reformers.  He  was  followed  by 
his  brother  Louis,  Prince  of  Conde. 

The  most  active  of  these  converts  was  d'Andelot.  In  April,  1558, 
he  visited  his  wife's  large  estates  in  Britanny  together  with  one  of  the 
Paris  pastors,  Gaspard  Carmel,  and  thus  helped  to  spread  Protestantism 
in  that  remote  and  conservative  province.  But  soon  after  his  return 
to  Paris  he  was  arrested  by  the  King's  order,  and  confined  at  Melun  for 
two  months.  The  immediate  cause  of  his  arrest  was  his  alleged  presence 
in  the  Pre-aux-Clercs,  where,  for  five  successive  evenings  (May  13-17),  a 
large  concourse  of  persons  of  all  ranks  had  assembled  to  take  part  in  the 
singing  of  Marot's  Psalms.  The  psalm-singing  was  stopped,  but  it  made 
a  considerable  stir,  for  as  many  as  five  or  six  thousand  were  said  to  have 
taken  part  in  it.  The  Protestants,  it  was  evident,  were  increasing  rapidly 
in  numbers  as  well  as  in  importance.  Calvin,  writing  on  February  24 
in  this  year,  says  that  he  had  been  told  by  a  good  authority  that  there 
were  300,000  Protestants  in  France. 

In  the  following  year,  1559,  another  important  step  was  taken.  On 
May  26  the  first  Synod  of  the  French  Protestant  Church  was  opened 
at  Paris.  We  do  not  know  how  many  deputies  were  present,  but 
apparently  there  were  representatives  of  a  considerable  proportion  of 
the  forty  to  fifty  Churches  then  constituted,  though  doubtless  in  some 
cases  the  same  deputy  represented  several  Churches.  There  was  also  a 
lay  element  consisting  of  elders.  The  pastor  of  the  Paris  Church, 
Francois  Morel,  was  chosen  as  president.  The  outcome  of  the  Synod, 
which  transacted  its  business  in  haste  and  secrecy,  was  a  scheme  of 
Church  government  or  "  Discipline,"  and  a  Confession  of  Faith.  The 
"  Discipline,"  which  was  based  on  the  principle  of  the  equalitj^  of  the 
individual  Churches,  recognised  the  already  prevailing  organisation  in 
each  Church,  namely  the  pastor  and  the  consistory  of  elders  and  deacons. 
The  election  to  the  consistory  being  by  co-optation,  the  government  was 
practically  an  oligarchy.  It  remained  to  weld  together  the  various 
Churches  into  a  united  whole.  This  was  done  by  instituting  first  an 
assembly  called  a  Colloquy,  which  bound  together  a  group  of  neighbouring 
Churches,  then  above  this  a  Provincial  Synod,  and  finally,  to  crown  the 
edifice,  a  National  Synod. 

The  Confession  of  Faith  was  based  on  one  drawn  up  by  Calvin  and 
sent  to  the  King  of  France  towards  the  close  of  1557.  Though  Calvin 
was  opposed  to  any  Confession  being  issued  by  the  Synod,  in  case  they 
should  persist  in  their  intention,  he  sent  to  them  an  enlarged  form 
of  his  former  Confession,  and  this  with  a  few  alterations  and  some 
additions  was  adopted.  The  language  of  it  is  singularly  clear  and 
noble,  and  is  doubtless  Calvin's  own. 


296  Francis  II  and  the  Guises  [1559 

A  few  days  after  the  close  of  the  Synod  the  King  attended  a  meeting 
of  the  whole  Parliament  of  Paris.  It  was  an  unusual  proceeding  on 
his  part,  but  the  occasion  was  a  special  one,  namely  the  adjourned 
consideration  of  the  whole  religious  question,  which  had  been  recently 
discussed  in  a  Mercuriale,  or  Wednesday  sitting,  held  at  the  end  of  April. 
Many  speakers  opposed  the  repressive  policy  of  the  government,  the 
boldest  being  Anne  du  Bourg,  nephew  of  the  former  Chancellor,  Antoine 
du  Bourg,  who  advocated  the  suspension  of  all  persecution  of  "  those 
who  were  called  heretics."  Henry  was  highly  incensed  at  the  plain 
speaking  of  the  counsellors,  and  had  du  Bourg  and  three  others  arrested. 
He  vowed  that  he  would  see  du  Bourg  burned  with  his  own  eyes.  But 
on  the  last  day  of  June,  at  the  jousts  in  the  Tournelles  held  in  honour 
of  the  approaching  marriage  between  Philip  of  Spain  and  Elizabeth  of 
France,  Henry  was  mortally  wounded  above  the  right  eye  by  the  broken 
lance  of  his  antagonist,  Gabriel  de  Montgomery,  the  captain  of  his 
Scottish  guard.     He  died  on  July  10,  1569. 

The  accession  to  the  throne  of  a  sickly  boy,  Francis  II,  threw  all  the 
power  into  the  hands  of  his  wife's  uncles,  the  Guises.  The  Queen- 
Mother  made  common  cause  with  them,  and  the  Constable  and  Diane 
de  Poitiers  were  driven  from  the  Court.  "  The  Cardinal,"  wrote  the 
Florentine  ambassador,  "is  Pope  and  King."  There  was  a  widespread 
feeling  of  discontent.  Though  the  King,  being  fifteen,  had  attained  his 
legal  majority,  it  was  urged  that  liis  weak  understanding  made  a 
Council  of  Government  necessary,  and  that  this  Council  ought  to  consist, 
according  to  custom,  of  the  Princes  of  the  Blood.  The  Guises  were 
unpopular  as  foreigners,  and  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  was  hated  on  his 
own  account.  Even  the  measures  which  he  took  for  the  much-needed 
improvement  of  the  finances  —  the  public  debt  amounted  to  over  forty 
million  livres  and  there  was  an  annual  deficit — added  to  his  unpopularity. 
An  active  element  of  discontent  was  furnished  by  the  younger  sons  of 
the  nobility,  whose  only  trade  was  war,  and  who  were  pressing  in  vain 
for  their  arrears  of  pa  v.  To  the  Protestants  the  Cardinal's  rule  was  a 
natural  source  of  apprehension.  He  was  known  to  be  a  thoroughgoing 
opponent  of  heresy  and  an  advocate  of  the  severest  measures  of  repression. 
At  first  the  Reformers  had  hopes  in  Catharine,  but  these  were  soon 
disappointed.  She  had  no  power  apart  from  the  Cardinal.  Severe 
persecutions  were  set  on*  foot,  and  Paris  began  to  have  the  air  of  a 
captured  city.  In  September  Calvin  was  consulted  as  to  whether 
persecution  might  be  resisted  by  force.  His  answer  was  unfavourable, 
but,  whatever  effect  it  may  have  had  on  his  co-religionists  as  a  body, 
the  political  agitation  continued.  The  execution  of  Anne  du  Bourg 
(IJecember  23,  1559),  his  speech  on  the  scaffold,  his  resolute  bearing, 
made  a  profound  impression,  not  only  on  Protestants  but  on  Catholics. 
"  His  one  speech,"  wrote  Florimond  de  Roemond,  who  was  an  eyewitness 


1560]  The  Tumult  of  Amhoise  297 

of  liis  execution,  "  did  more  harm  to  the  Catholic  Church  than  a  hundred 
ministers  could  have  done."  The  malcontents  increased  in  number,  but 
they  lacked  a  leader.  Their  natural  leader,  the  King  of  Navarre,  was 
too  unstable  and  irresolute.  His  brother  Conde  promised  them  his  secret 
support  provided  their  enterprise  was  limited  to  the  capture  of  the 
Guises.  When  that  was  effected  he  could  come  forward.  Meanwhile 
an  acting  leader  was  found  in  a  Protestant  gentleman  of  Perigord, 
Godefroy  de  Barry,  Seigneur  de  la  Renaudie,  whose  brother-in-law, 
Gaspard  de  Heu,  a  patriotic  citizen  of  Metz,  had  recently  been  strangled 
by  order  of  the  Guises  without  form  of  trial  in  the  castle  of  Vincennes. 
A  large  meeting  of  noblemen  and  others  was  held  secretly  at  Nantes 
on  February  1,  1560  ;  and  it  was  agreed  that  the  arrest  of  the  Guises 
should  take  place  at  Blois  on  March  6.  Finding  hoAvever  before  this 
date  that  the  Court  had  already  left  Blois  for  Amboise  the  conspirators 
altered  it  to  the  16th.  Already  on  February  12  the  Cardinal  had  been 
informed,  in  somewhat  vague  terms,  of  the  existence  of  the  plot.  On 
his  arrival  at  Amboise  ten  days  later  he  received  more  precise  informa- 
tion. The  Duke  of  Guise  took  measures  accordingly  ;  several  small 
bands  of  conspirators  were  captured  ;  Jacques  de  la  Mothe,  Baron  de 
Castelnau,  a  Gascon  nobleman,  who  had  seized  the  castle  of  Noizay  near 
Amboise,  capitulated  on  a  promise  of  pardon  ;  and  finally  la  Renaudie 
himself  was  killed  in  a  skirmish  (March  19).  Summary  vengeance  was 
taken  on  the  prisoners  ;  some  were  hanged,  some  beheaded,  some  flung 
into  the  Loire  in  sacks.  Castelnau,  who  Avas  honoured  with  a  form  of 
trial,  was  executed  on  March  29.  The  Chancellor,  Frangois  Olivier, 
who  had  presided  at  his  trial,  died  on  the  following  day. 

The  Tumult  of  Amboise,  as  it  was  comtemptuously  called,  had  been 
rashly  designed  and  feebly  executed.  But  its  barbarous  suppression 
increased  the  unpopularity  of  the  government  and  the  disorder  in  the  state 
of  the  kingdom.  In  April  and  May  there  were  frequent  disturbances  in 
Dauphine  and  Provence.  In  Dauphine,  where  the  Bishop  of  Valence, 
Jean  de  Montluc,  and  the  Archbishop  of  Vienne,  Charles  de  Marillac, 
were  in  favour  of  toleration,  the  Protestants  had  an  able  leader  in 
Montbrun.  In  Provence  Protestantism  was  spreading  rapidh^  and,  at  a 
conference  held  at  Merindol  on  February  15, 1560,  sixty  Churches  were 
represented.  Here  also  there  was  an  active  and  resolute  leader  in  the 
person  of  Antoine  de  Mouvans.  Meanwhile  the  hatred  of  the  Guises 
found  vent  in  numerous  pamphlets,  one  of  which  has  become  almost  a 
classic.  It  was  entitled  a  '■'■  Letter  sent  to  the  Tiger  of  France,''''  and  was 
written  by  the  distinguished  jurist,  Frangois  Hotman. 

It  was  evident  that  some  change  must  be  made  in  the  policy  of  the 
government.  Catharine  saw  her  opportunity  of  checking  the  power  of 
the  Guises.  By  her  influence  Michel  de  I'Hopital  was  made  Chancellor, 
and,  though  the  formal  decree  of  his  appointment  was  not  drawn  up 
till  June  30,  he  assumed  the  duties  of  his  office  on  his  arrival  at  Paris 


298  Protestant  plot.     Arrest  of  Conde  [i560 

early  in  May.  His  first  step  was  to  secure  the  passing  of  the  Edict  of 
Romorantin  (May  18,  1560),  which  restored  to  the  Bishops  the  sole 
cognisance  of  cases  of  simple  heresy,  and  imposed  penalties  on  false 
accusers.  In  spite  of  its  apparent  severity  it  was  in  realit}^  milder  than 
that  of  Compiegne,  for  it  allowed  several  stages  of  appeal.  Moreover  it 
obviated  the  introduction  of  the  Inquisition.  It  was  also  by  the  advice 
of  the  Chancellor,  supported  by  that  of  Coligny,  that  Catharine  called 
together  an  Assembly  of  Notables,  which  met  at  Fontainebleau  on 
August  21.  Among  the  speakers  were  the  two  prelates,  Montluc  and 
Marillac.  They  both  deprecated  extreme  measures  of  repression  and 
warmly  advocated  two  remedies,  the  reformation  of  the  morals 
and  discipline  of  the  clergy,  and  either  a  General  or  a  National  Council. 

Still  more  important  was  the  attitude  of  Coligny.  At  the  very  open- 
ing of  the  second  session  he  presented  a  petition  from  the  Protestants,  in 
which,  after  protesting  their  loyalty  to  the  King,  they  begged  that  the 
prosecutions  might  cease  and  that  "  temples  "  might  be  assigned  to  them 
for  worship.  There  were  no  signatures,  but  Coligny,  when  it  came  to 
his  turn  to  speak,  declared  that  he  could  have  obtained  50,000  names 
in  Normandy  alone.  He  went  on  to  advocate  warmly  the  proposals  of 
Montluc  and  Marillac.  Thus  the  wisest  statesman  in  France  stood  boldly 
forward  as  the  champion  of  the  Protestants.  The  assembly  broke  up  on 
August  25,  and  on  the  following  day  the  Estates  were  summoned  for 
December  10  and  an  assembly  of  the  clergy  for  January  20.  Meanwhile 
all  prosecutions  for  simple  heresy,  apart  from  sedition,  were  to  cease. 

Hardly  had  this  decision  been  announced  when  information  was 
received  of  a  fresh  plot,  in  which  not  only  Navarre  and  Conde  but  the 
Constable  and  other  Catholic  nobles  were  implicated.  Its  exact,  nature 
remains  a  mystery,  but  it  seems  clear  that  a  general  rising  in  the  South 
of  France  under  the  leadership  of  the  Bourbon  Princes  was  contemplated. 
Calvin  knew  of  it,  but  apparently  hoped  that  if  a  sufficiently  imposing 
demonstration  were  made  bloodshed  would  be  averted.  With  this 
object  Beza  had  gone  to  Nerac  to  urge  the  King  of  Navarre  to  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  movement.  A  relative  of  Conde's,  Jean 
de  Malign)^,  did  actually  seize  part  of  Lyons,  but  from  want  of  proper 
support  had  to  retire  (September  5).  Throughout  the  months  of 
September  and  October  the  Court  was  agitated  with  news  of  disturbances 
in  the  provinces,  especially  in  Languedoc.  As  the  result  of  Catharine's 
fears  the  Guises  regained  their  ascendancy,  and  made  it  their  first  object 
to  get  possession  of  the  persons  of  Navarre  and  Conde,  both  of  whom 
had  declined  an  invitation  to  the  assembly  of  Fontainebleau.  They 
were  peremptorily  summoned  to  Court,  and  towards  the  end  of  September 
set  out  to  obey  the  summons.  Rejecting  the  urgent  invitations  which 
they  received  on  the  way  to  put  themselves  at  the  head  of  an  armed 
force  they  arrived  at  Orleans,  where  the  Court  now  was,  on  October  30. 
Conde  was  immediately  arrested,  and  Navarre,  though  left  at  liberty, 


io6i]  Charles  IX. — Estates  of  Orleans  299 

was  closely  watched.  On  November  26  Conde  was  condemned  to  death 
and  his  execution  was  fixed  for  December  10,  More  than  one  attempt 
was  made  to  assassinate  the  King  of  Navarre  ;  and  there  were  vague 
rumours  that  the  Cardinal  intended  to  remove  by  death  or  imprisonment 
all  the  leaders  of  the  opposition.  But  his  scheme,  whatever  it  was, 
was  frustrated  by  the  young  King's  death,  after  a  brief  illness,  on 
December  5. 

During  the  short  reign  of  Francis  II  a  great  change  had  been 
wrought  in  the  character  of  French  Protestantism.  Though  still  purely 
religious  in  its  aims  it  had  become  imbued  with  a  political  element. 
The  fact  that  the  natural  leaders  of  the  opposition  to  the  Guises  were 
Protestants  made  this  inevitable.  It  was  both  an  evil  and  a  gain  —  an 
evil  because  it  brought  into  the  Protestant  ranks  men  whose  onl}^ 
Protestantism  consisted  in  offering  the  grossest  insults  to  forms  of  reli- 
gion consecrated  by  long  usage  and  deep-rooted  in  the  affections  of 
the  people  ;  a  gain,  because  henceforth  Protestantism,  powerful  in  the 
numbers,  quality  and  organisation  of  its  adherents,  and  led  by  men  of 
the  highest  rank  in  the  kingdom,  became  a  force  in  the  State.  To  this 
new  condition  of  things  corresponded  a  new  name,  that  of  Huguenot. 
Its  precise  origin  is  uncertain,  but  recent  research  has  shown  that  it  is  at 
any  rate  purely  French. 

The  death  of  Francis  II  brought  the  Guise  domination  to  an  end. 
His  successor,  Charles  IX,  was  only  ten  years  old,  and  therefore  unques- 
tionably a  minor.  There  was  no  longer  the  influence  of  a  wife  to 
overshadow  that  of  the  mother,  and  the  right  to  the  Regency  belonged 
by  custom  to  the  King  of  Navarre.  But  just  before  the  late  King's 
death  Navarre  had  renounced,  so  far  as  he  legally  could,  this  right  in 
favour  of  Catharine,  on  condition  that  his  position  in  the  kingdom 
should  be  inferior  only  to  hers.  It  was  to  Navarre  therefore  and  the 
Constable,  who  was  at  once  recalled  to  Court,  that  Catharine  gave  the 
chief  place  in  her  counsels  ;  and  it  was  upon  Navarre  that  the  hopes  of 
the  Huguenots  were  now  centred. 

The  first  event  of  the  new  reign  was  the  meeting  of  the  Estates  at 
Orleans  on  December  13.  The  Chancellor  in  his  opening  speech  depre- 
cated persecution  for  religious  opinions,  and  urged  mutual  toleration  and 
the  abandonment  of  offensive  nicknames  such  as  Papist  and  Huguenot. 
On  January  1,  1561,  the  representatives  of  the  three  Estates  made  their 
speeches  ;  and  in  the  course  of  the  next  ten  days  the  various  caJiiers,  or 
written  statements  of  grievances,  were  presented.  Both  the  nobles  and 
the  Third  Estate  insisted  strongly  on  the  need  for  a  reformation  of  the 
Church.  As  regards  Protestantism  the  Third  Estate  pressed  for  com- 
plete toleration,  while  the  clergy  demanded  vigorous  measures  of  repres- 
sion. The  nobles,  being  divided  in  their  opinions,  presented  three  cahiers 
representing  three  groups  of  provinces.     One  group,  consisting  of  the 


300  Disturbances  in  various  towns  [io6i 

central  provinces,  were  in  favour  of  rigid  repression  ;  another,  formed  by 
tlie  western  provinces  and  the  towns  of  Rouen  and  Toulouse,  demanded 
toleration  ;  while  the  third  group,  composed  of  the  Eastern  provinces 
with  Normandy  and  Languedoc,  urged  that  both  parties  should  be 
ordered  to  keep  the  peace  and  that  only  preachers  and  pastors  should  be 
punished.  All  three  Estates  alike  demanded  the  abolition  of  the  Con- 
cordat. On  January  28  a  royal  Edict  was  issued  ordering  Parliament  to 
stop  all  prosecutions  for  i*eligion  and  to  release  all  prisoners.  On  the 
31st  the  Estates  were  prorogued  till  May  1  for  the  purpose  of  considering 
the  financial  question.  The  meeting  of  the  clergy  fixed  for  January  20 
was  dropped,  in  view  of  the  General  Council  which  the  Pope  had  ordered 
to  reassemble  at  Trent  on  Easter-Day.  Meanwhile  the  answer  of  the 
government  to  the  demands  of  the  Estates  was  being  embodied  in  a 
statute  known  as  the  Ordinance  of  Orleans  which,  though  dated  January 
31,  1561,  was  not  completed  till  the  following  August.  The  Concordat 
was  abolished,  and  the  election  of  the  Bishops  was  transferred  to  a  mixed 
body  of  laymen  and  ecclesiastics  who  were  to  submit  three  names  to  the 
King.     Residence  was  imposed  on  all  holders  of  benefices. 

The  Edict  of  January  28  and  the  general  attitude  of  the  government 
gave  a  considerable  impulse  to  the  Protestant  movement.  On  March  2 
their  second  national  synod  was  held  at  Poitiers.  At  Fontainebleau 
during  Lent  Protestant  ministers  preached  openly  in  the  apartments  of 
Coligny  and  of  Conde  ;  fasting  was  ostentatiously  neglected  ;  and  the 
Queen-Mother  and  the  King  listened  to  sermons  from  Bishop  Montluc 
in  one  of  the  state  rooms  of  the  palace.  The  mere  fact  of  a  Bishop 
preaching  marked  him  as  a  Lutheran  in  the  eyes  of  old-fashioned 
Catholics.  The  Constable,  who  went  to  hear  Montluc  once,  came  away 
in  high  dudgeon.  His  orthodoxy  took  alarm  at  this  general  encourage- 
ment of  heretical  doctrine  and  practice  ;  and  at  a  supper  party  at  his 
house  on  Easter-Day  (April  6)  he  formed  with  the  Due  de  Guise  and 
St  Andre  a  union  which  was  afterwards  known  as  the  Triumvirate.  As 
the  result  of  success  the  Protestants  became  insolent  and  defiant.  At 
Agen  and  Montauban  they  seized  unused  Catholic  places  of  worship. 
In  many  towns  the  mob  rose  against  them  and  the  disturbances  ended  in 
bloodshed.  At  Beauvais,  where  the  Cardinal  de  Chatillon  vvas  Bishop, 
there  was  a  dangerous  riot  on  Easter  Monday,  in  consequence  of  which 
an  Edict  was  issued  on  April  19  forbidding  all  provocation  to  disturb- 
ance. It  remained  a  dead  letter.  At  the  end  of  the  month  a  Paris  mob 
having  attacked  the  house  of  a  Protestant  nobleman  was  fired  on  by  the 
defenders.  The  assailants  fled,  leaving  several  dead,  and  more  wounded. 
On  May  2  there  were  fresh  disturbances.  It  was  not  till  the  middle  of 
the  month  that  the  condition  of  the  capital  began  to  grow  quieter.  On 
May  28  the  clergy  of  Paris  presented  a  remonstrance  on  the  conduct  of 
the  Protestants  ;  and  on  June  11  the  Protestants  presented  a  petition 
asking  for  churches  to  be  assigned  to  themor  for  permission  to  build  them. 


1561]  Proposals  of  the  Estates  301 

In  their  perplexity  the  government  determined  on  a  conference 
between  the  Council  and  the  Parliament  of  Paris,  to  consider  the  means 
of  putting  an  end  to  these  disturbances.  On  June  18  the  Chancellor 
opened  the  proceedings  in  a  clear  and  impartial  speech.  The  delibera- 
tions dragged  on  from  June  23  to  July  11.  As  the  result  a  new  Edict, 
known  as  the  "  Edict  of  July,"  was  issued  (registered  July  31).  All  acts 
and  words  tending  to  faction  or  disturbance  were  forbidden.  Attend- 
ance at  any  assembly  at  which  worship  was  celebrated  otherwise  than 
according  to  the  forms  of  the  Catholic  Church  was  to  be  punished  by 
imprisonment  and  confiscation  of  ]3roperty.  The  cognisance  of  cases  of 
simple  heresy  was  left  to  the  ecclesiastical  Courts.  If  the  accused  was 
handed  over  to  the  secular  arm  no  penalty  higher  than  banishment 
could  be  imposed.  Finally  it  was  stated  that  the  Edict  was  onl}^  pro- 
visional, pending  the  decision  of  either  a  General  or  a  National  Council. 
In  spite  of  this  provisional  character  the  Edict  found  no  favour  with 
either  party.     Both  alike  abused  and  ignored  it. 

On  August  1  the  prorogued  meeting  of  the  Estates,  fixed  originally 
for  May,  was  opened  at  Pontoise.  Only  twenty-six  deputies  were 
present,  thirteen  for  each  of  the  two  lay  Estates  ;  the  deputies  of  the 
clergy  were  alreadj^  in  session  at  Poissy,  where  the  ecclesiastical  synod 
had  begun  to  sit  on  July  28.  It  was  not  till  August  27  that  the  cahiers 
were  presented  at  a  session  held  at  St  Germain  at  which  the  clerical 
deputies  were  also  present.  Both  cahiers  were  remarkable  for  the  bold- 
ness of  their  proposals.  They  included  a  total  reform  of  the  judicial 
system,  and  a  transference  of  a  share  in  the  sovereignty  to  the  Estates 
by  making  their  consent  requisite  for  war  or  for  an}'  new  taxation.  To 
meet  the  financial  difhculties  three  proposals  were  made.  The  most 
thoroughgoing  was  one  made  by  the  Third  Estate,  that  the  whole 
ecclesiastical  property  of  the  kingdom  should  be  nationalised,  that  the 
clergy  should  be  paid  by  the  State,  and  that  out  of  the  surplus  of 
72,000,000  livres  thus  okained  42,000,000  should  be  devoted  to  the 
liquidation  of  the  public  debt.  However  enlightened  this  proposal 
may  have  been  it  was  neither  practical  nor  opportune.  It  completed 
the  alienation  of  the  Paris  Parliament  from  civil  and  religious  reform  ; 
and  it  led  to  an  arrangement  between  the  clergy  and  the  Crown. 
Alarmed  by  the  proposals  for  their  spoliation  the  clergy  offered  the 
Crown  a  sum  of  16,600,000  livres,  to  be  paid  in  instalments  spread  over 
ten  years.     The  offer  was  accepted. 

With  regard  to  the  religious  question  the  nobles  and  the  Third 
Estate  alike  advocated  complete  toleration  and  the  calling  together  of  a 
National  Council.  Already  on  July  25  a  proclamation  had  been  issued 
inviting  the  Protestant  ministers  to  the  assembly  at  Poissy.  It  was  to 
be  a  National  Council  in  everything  but  the  name.  So  much  concession 
was  made  to  the  Pope  and  the  King  of  Spain.  Accordingly  on  Sep- 
tember 9  the  village  of  Poissy,  three  miles  west  of  St  Germain,  celebrated 


302  The  Colloquy  of  Polssy  [i56l 

as  the  birthplace  of  St  Louis,  was  the  scene  of  unusual  splendour.  The 
Protestants  were  represented  at  the  "  Colloquy  "  (as  it  came  to  be  called) 
by  twelve  ministers,  including  Beza,  Frangois  de  Morel,  the  president  of 
the  first  National  Synod,  and  Nicolas  des  Gallars,  the  minister  of  the 
French  Protestant  Church  in  London,  and  by  twenty  laymen.  Six 
Cardinals,  forty  Archbishops  and  Bishops,  twelve  doctors  of  the  Sor- 
bonne,  and  as  many  canonists,  represented  the  French  Catholic  Church. 
The  King  and  the  Queen-Mother,  the  rest  of  the  royal  family,  the 
Princes  of  the  Blood,  and  the  members  of  the  Council  of  State,  com- 
pleted the  imposing  assemblage. 

The  chief  event  of  the  first  da}^  was  Beza's  speech,  which,  both  in 
matter  and  manner,  made  a  deep  impression.  The  Cardinal  of  Lorraine 
replied  to  it  on  September  16.  Though  his  speech  was  contemptuously 
criticised  by  his  theological  opponents,  it  was  skilfully  adapted  to  his 
purpose  of  making  a  favourable  impression  on  the  unlearned  majority  of 
his  audience.  Both  Coligny  and  Conde  praised  it.  But  even  more  than 
Beza's  it  was  the  speech  of  an  advocate,  and  it  concluded  with  a  fervid 
appeal  to  the  young  King  to  remain  in  the  faith  of  his  ancestors.  On 
September  19  Ippolito  d'Este,  the  Cardinal  of  Ferrara,  who  enjoyed  the 
revenues  of  three  French  archbishoprics,  one  bishopric,  and  eight  abbeys, 
arrived  at  St  Germain  in  the  capacity  of  legate  a  latere  from  Pius  IV, 
with  instructions  to  use  his  influence  to  stop  the  conference.  In  his 
numerous  suite  was  Laynez,  the  successor  of  Lo3rola  as  General  of  the 
Jesuit  Order,  whose  college  at  Paris  had  been  formally  legalised  by  the 
assembly  at  Poissy  four  days  before.  Whether  owing  to  the  efforts  of 
the  legate  or  not,  the  last  two  meetings  of  the  Colloquy,  which  were 
held  on  September  24  and  26  with  greatly  diminished  numbers,  were 
wasted  in  angry  and  useless  discussion.  The  speech  of  Laynez  on  the 
26th  was  especially  uncompromising.  Catharine  however  did  not  despair. 
She  arranged  a  conference  between  five  of  the  Protestant  ministers  and 
five  of  the  Catholic  clergy  who  favoured  reform.  Among  the  Protestants 
was  the  famous  Peter  Martyr,  who  had  arrived  at  Poissy  on  the  evening 
of  September  9.  The  delegates  met  on  September  30  and  the  following 
day.  Having  drawn  up  a  formula  relating  to  the  sacrament  of  Holy 
Communion,  they  submitted  it  to  the  assembly  of  Bishops,  by  whom  it 
was  straightway  rejected  (October  9). 

From  Catharine's  point  of  view  the  Colloquy  had,  as  she  said,  borne 
no  fruit.  It  had  failed  to  bring  about  the  religious  unity  which  seemed 
to  her  essential  to  the  pacification  of  the  kingdom.  On  Sunday,  Octo- 
ber 12,  there  was  a  fresh  tumult  at  Paris  outside  the  gate  of  St  Antoine  ; 
and  several  Protestants  were  killed  or  wounded.  Moreover  the  outlook 
abroad  was  threatening.  The  Spanish  ambassador,  Thomas  Perrenot 
de  Chantonnay,  told  Catharine  in  his  usual  bullying  tone  that  his 
master  was  ready  to  come  to  the  assistance  of  her  Catholic  subjects. 
But  the  Queen -regent  put  on  a  bold  front,  and  showed  a  determination 


1561-2]  The  Conference  at  St  Germam  303 

to  be  mistress  in  her  own  house.  The  Guises  now  left  the  Court 
(October  20),  and  were  shortly  followed  by  the  Constable  and  the 
Marechal  de  Saint  Andre.  The  principal  management  of  affairs 
passed  into  the  hands  of  Coligny  and  the  Chancellor.  Never  had  the 
Protestants  been  so  sanguine  of  success.  Though  the  Colloquy  had 
failed  to  produce  the  result  which  Catharine,  and  perhaps  a  few 
liberal  Bishops,  like  Montluc,  had  expected,  from  the  Protestant  point 
of  view  it  had  been  singularly  successful.  It  had  enabled  the  Re- 
formers to  publish  urhi  et  orhi  by  the  mouth  of  one  of  their  ablest 
and  most  eloquent  representatives  a  clear  statement  of  their  doctrines. 
It  is  true  that  by  the  so-called  Edict  of  Restitution,  issued  on  October 
20,  as  an  equivalent  for  the  sixteen  millions  voted  by  the  clergy,  the 
Protestants  were  ordered  to  restore  all  the  churches  of  which  they 
had  taken  possession  ;  but  almost  at  the  same  time  Beza  persuaded 
the  government  to  send  letters  to  the  provincial  magistrates  enjoining 
them  to  allow  the  Protestants  to  meet  in  security,  and  to  interpret  the 
Edict  in  a  lenient  spirit,  pending  a  more  definite  settlement.  Even  in 
Catholic  Paris  the  numbers  attending  the  meetings  reached  15,000. 
The  demand  for  ministers  was  greater  than  Geneva  could  satisf3^  On 
Michaelmas-day  Beza  had  celebrated,  according  to  the  Protestant  rite, 
the  marriage  of  a  young  Rohan  with  the  niece  of  Madame  d'Etampes. 
There  were  rumours  that  several  Bishops  vvould  shortly  declare  them- 
selves Protestants  ;  there  were  even  hopes  of  the  King. 

Meanwhile  the  country  was  in  a  more  disturbed  state  than  ever. 
On  November  16  there  was  a  massacre  at  Cahors  ;  every  Sunday  pro- 
duced a  disturbance  at  Paris,  and  the  Feast  of  St  John  (December  27) 
was  signalised  by  one  of  more  than  ordinary  violence  round  the  Church 
of  St  Medard.  Partly  in  consequence  of  these  outbreaks  Catharine 
summoned  a  fresh  conference  to  meet  at  St  Germain  on  January  3, 1562. 
On  the  7th  the  actual  business  began  with  a  remarkable  speech  by  the 
Chancellor  in  which,  far  in  advance  of  his  time,  he  enunciated  modern 
principles  of  religious  toleration.  The  question  before  them,  he  said, 
was  a  political,  not  a  religious  one  ;  "  a  man  may  be  a  citizen  without 
being  a  Christian."  Those  who  had  been  summoned  to  the  conference, 
thirty  Presidents  and  Councillors  chosen  from  the  eight  Parliaments  and 
twenty  members  of  the  Privy  Council  including  the  Princes  of  the  Blood, 
then  gave  their  opinions  in  order.  The  King  of  Navarre's  speech  showed 
that  he  had  virtually  abandoned  the  Protestant  cause.  This  step,  to 
which  his  position  rather  than  his  character  gave  importance,  had  for 
some  time  been  skilfully  manoeuvred  by  the  Cardinal  of  Ferrara,  who 
had  dangled  before  the  King  various  suggestions  of  compensation  for  the 
territory  of  Spanish  Navarre,  of  which  his  wife's  ancestor  had  been 
deprived  by  Ferdinand  the  Catholic.  In  the  final  voting  the  party  of 
repression  coalesced  with  the  middle  party,  which  thus  obtained  a  small 
majority  ;  and  it  was  in  the  sense  of  their  views  that  an  Edict  was  drawn 


304:  The  Edict  of  January  [i562 

up  (January  17).  By  this  Edict,  known  as  the  "  Edict  of  January," 
which  was  dechired  to  be  provisional  pending  the  decision  of  a  General 
Council,  the  Protestants  were  ordered  to  give  up  all  the  churches  and 
other  ecclesiastical  buildings  in  their  possession,  and  were  forbidden  to 
assemble  in  any  building,  or  to  assemble  at  all  within  the  walls  of  any 
city.  With  these  limitations  the  right  of  assemblage  free  of  molestation 
was  granted  to  them.  Thus  Protestantism  for  the  first  time  in  France 
obtained  legal  recognition.  The  Protestants  were  far  from  satisfied,  but, 
acting  on  the  advice  of  their  leaders,  they  accepted  the  compromise. 
The  Catholics  were  less  submissive.  It  was  not  till  after  a  long  and 
obstinate  resistance  that  the  Parliament  of  Paris  registered  the  Edict  on 
March  6.  By  that  date  the  issue  to  which  events  had  been  inevitably 
tending  had  already  declared  itself.     The  religious  war  had  begun. 


CHAPTER   X 

THE   HELVETIC   REFORMATIO?^ 

The  Helvetic  Reformation,  like  the  German,  was  the  outcome  of 
both  the  national  history  and  the  Renaissance.  The  history  of  Switzer- 
land had  been  a  record  of  free  communities  in  town  or  country,  more  than 
holding  their  own  under  changing  local  dynasties  and  weakening  imperial 
power.  Gradually  a  sense  of  national  unity  emerges,  but  earlier  local 
connexions  are  long  retained.  The  Teutonic  communities  of  Uri, 
Schwyz,  and  Unterwalden  separately  gain  their  independence  in  ways 
common  enough  elsewhere,  and  then  become  the  centre  of  the  later 
confederation.  The  lands  around  them  are  divided  into  two  strongly 
marked  parts  —  a  Burgundian  west,  looking  towards  France,  Burgundy, 
and  Savoy,  converted  by  Gallic  or  Roman  missionaries,  divided  among 
many  dynasties,  and  a  Swabian  or  Alamannic  east,  richer  in  civilisation 
and  democratic  cities,  converted  by  Irish  missionaries,  looking  by  the 
run  of  its  valleys  and  the  lie  of  its  plains  towards  Germany.  This 
division  lasts  through  the  Frankish  Empire  and  through  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  is  the  most  essential  feature  in  Swiss  history. 

The  growth  of  the  early  Habsburg  power,  following  the  extinction 
of  the  House  of  Zaringen  (1218),  at  first  threatened  the  freedom  of  the 
Swiss  ;  the  connexion  of  the  Habsburg  House  with  the  Empire  gave  it 
an  imperial  claim  to  jurisdiction  in  addition  to  the  varied  local  claims 
it  already  possessed,  though  at  the  same  time  it  absorbed  its  energy  in 
other  and  more  important  fields.  The  tendencies  to  union  shown  by  the 
German  Leagues  operated  also  among  the  Swiss  communities,  and  in  the 
end  gave  rise  to  the  Perpetual  League  of  the  three  Forest  Cantons, 
Schwyz,  Uri,  and  Unterwalden  (August,  1291),  with  simple  provisions 
for  maintaining  their  primitive  liberty  and  regulating  their  mutual 
relations.  The  League  concluded  at  Brunnen  on  December  13,  1315, 
after  the  great  battle  of  Morgarten,  added  nothing  essential,  although  it 
bound  the  members  more  closely  together  against  a  usurping  lord.  The 
accidents  of  Habsburg  history  and  the  varied  grouping  of  the  neigh- 
bouring Powers  kept  this  early  league  alive  and  even  caused  it  to 
grow  :  victories  against  the  Habsburgs  and  afterwards  against  Burgundy 

c.  M.  H.  n.  305  20 


306  The  Swiss  Confederation. — Ziiricli 

confirmed  its  strength  and  increased  its  reputation.  Soon  cities  with 
dependent  villages  under  them,  Luzern,  Zurich,  and  Bern,  joined  the 
Confederates,  and  introduced  divergent  interests  and  policies.  Around 
central  Switzerland  with  its  thirteen  Cantons  —  those  already  mentioned, 
with  Glarus,  Zug,  Freiburg,  Solothurn,  Basel,  Schaffhausen,  and  Appen- 
zell  —  there  arose  other  leagues,  the  League  of  God's  House  among  the 
subjects  of  the  see  of  Chur,  the  Graubiinden  (or  Grisons),  and  the 
League  of  the  Ten  Jurisdictions,  differing  in  constitution  and  with 
histories  of  their  own.  In  varying  relations  to  the  Confederation  stood 
also  dependent  States  (the  Valais,  the  town  and  Abbey  of  St  Gallen, 
and  others). 

The  Federal  government  not  only  gathered  fresh  members,  but  made 
conquests  of  its  own  :  the  Aargau  (1415),  partly  divided  between  Bern 
and  Zurich,  partly,  in  the  Free  Bailiwicks,  ruled  jointly  by  the  six 
Cantons  (Zurich,  Luzern,  Schwyz,  Unterwalden,  Zug,  and  Glarus)  ;  the 
Thurgau,  similarly  ruled,  but  with  special  relations  to  Zurich.  The 
government  of  these  Common  Lands  was  a  difficult  matter,  as  there  was 
no  Federal  organisation  beyond  the  Diet,  to  which  the  Cantons  sent 
delegates.  The  Free  Bailiwicks  were  administered  by  a  Bailiff  (^Landvogt')^ 
appointed  for  two  years  by  each  of  the  six  Cantons  in  turn.  This  defec- 
tive system  demanded  perfect  unity  among  the  Confederates  before  it 
could  work  ;  and  the  chance  of  discord  was  greater  because  these  Subject 
Lands  lay  between  Zurich  and  Bern,  and  closed  the  path  northwards  from 
the  Forest  Cantons.  To  the  south  moreover  conquests  had  been  made 
towards  Italy,  and  thus  the  Confederates  were  brought  into  touch  with 
Italian  as  well  as  with  German  and  more  western  politics. 

Among  the  Confederates,  Zurich  (which  joined  them  May,  1351) 
held  a  peculiar  place.  Favoured  by  Austria,  and  as  an  imperial  city, 
Zurich  had  followed  a  distinct  policy  of  its  own  which  had  at  times  led 
to  war  (for  instance,  1442-50).  What  Bern,  with  its  distinct  aims  and 
more  aristocratic  constitution,  was  to  the  west,  Zurich,  with  its  important 
gilds  and  widespread  trade,  was  to  the  east.  The  Confederacy  was 
again  divided  by  the  diversity  of  interests  between  rural  and  urban 
Cantons  ;  moreover,  city  factions,  as  at  Luzern,  Zurich,  and  Bern,  had 
looked  to  the  Confederacy  for  help,  and  conversely  civic  disturbances 
could  shake  the  Confederate  League.  The  conquests  from  Austria,  and 
the  entanglement  in  the  wars  of  France  and  Burgundy,  and  in  those  of 
Italy,  involved  the  Confederacy  in  external  relations  out  of  all  propor- 
tion to  its  constitutional  growth.  The  problem  of  Federal  organisation 
was  handed  down  unsolved  by  the  Middle  Ages,  together  with  conditions 
that  made  it  difficult  of  solution. 

Iluldreich  Zwingli  was  born  on  New  Year's  Day,  1484,  at  Wildhaus 
in  the  valley  of  Toggenburg.  This  district,  after  the  extinction  of  its 
dynasty  (1436),  had  been  an  object  of  strife  between  Zurich  and  Schwyz; 


1484-1506]  The  youth  of  Zwingli  307 

but  in  the  end  it  had  passed  by  purchase  to  the  Abbey  of  St  Gallen. 
The  inhabitants  of  Wildhaus  had  gained  the  rights  of  electing  their 
village  bailiff  and  choosing  their  own  village  priest.  Zwingli's  father 
held  the  former,  and  his  uncle  Bartholomew  the  latter,  ofBce ;  when 
this  uncle  (1487)  became  rural  dean  and  rector  of  Wesen  on  the  Lake 
of  Wallenstadt,  the  young  boy,  already  destined  for  clerical  life,  went 
with  him.  His  family  was  thus  respected  and  versed  in  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  matters ;  on  the  mother's  side,  too,  one  uncle  was  Abbot 
of  Fischingen,  and  another  relative  Abbot  of  Old  St  John's,  near 
AVesen.  In  1494  Zwingli  was  sent  to  Basel  to  be  under  Gregory 
Bunzli,  and  in  1498  to  Bern,  where  his  teacher  was  Heinrich  Wolflin 
(Lupulus),  then  the  most  famous  humanist  in  Switzerland.  He  was 
moved  from  Bern,  lest  the  Dominicans  should  secure  him  as  a  novice,  and 
he  is  next  found  at  Vienna,  where  his  classical  bent  was  strengthened. 
In  1502  he  returned  to  Basel  where,  in  1504,  he  graduated  as  Bachelor ; 
the  University  was  not  then  at  its  best,  but  the  city  was  still  a  centre  of 
Swiss  life  and  of  the  trade  in  books  ;  he  became  a  teacher  at  St  Martin's 
School,  and  thus  his  mind  was  early  trained  in  the  habit  of  instruction. 
In  1506  he  was  called  to  the  charge  of  Glarus,  an  important  town  wath 
three  outlying  hamlets,  and  was  ordained  priest  at  Constance. 

The  impulses  forming  his  character  had  been  simple  :  the  democratic 
spirit  of  a  self-governing  village  with  traditions  of  its  struggles — in  1490 
he  must  have  seen  the  Abbot  of  St  Gallen  appear  with  a  small  army  to 
reduce  his  subjects  to  obedience ;  the  training  of  the  parish  priest  with 
a  sense  of  responsibilitj'-  (discharged  as  he  even  then  significantly  held 
mainly  by  preaching)  ;  the  life  of  the  village  with  its  many  activities  of 
a  smaller  kind.  But  stronger  than  all  these  was  his  humanistic  training, 
which  at  Glarus  he  had  time  to  follow  out.  Traces  of  the  current 
classical  taste  are  seen  in  him  to  the  end :  one  of  these  was  his  belief  in 
the  divine  inspiration  of  Cato  and  other  ancients  with  their  high  ideal 
of  patriotism ;  hence,  too,  came  his  deep  interest  in  the  salvation  of  the 
great  ancients  who  lived  before  Christ.  But  he  was  a  humanist  who 
never  sought  a  patron. 

Before  he  came  to  Glarus  he  had  been  under  the  influence  of  Thomas 
Wyttenbach  (1505-6),  a  lecturer  at  Basel,  from  whom  he  had  learnt  the 
evils  of  Indulgences  and  the  authority  of  the  Bible.  These  crude  ideas 
of  reform  were  not  however  confined  to  Wyttenbach,  and  it  was  only  in 
order  to  minimise  his  debt  to  Luther  that  Zwingli  mentions  this  earlier 
indebtedness.  But  he  had  made  closer  acquaintance  with  Church  abuses ; 
for  Heinrich  Goldli,  a  Swiss  of  the  Papal  Guard  and  a  trafficker  in 
benefices,  had  bought  the  reversion  of  Glarus,  and  Zwingli  had  to  pay 
him  a  pension  of  100  gulden  before  entering  upon  his  charge. 

In  classics  P^rasmus  was  his  guide  ;  good  letters  and  sound  theology 
were  to  go  together  ;  the  spirit  of  the  German  Renaissance  was  to 
inspire  theology  ;  but  of  deep  personal  religion  Zwingli  at  this  stage  was 


308       Zwingli's  Jmmanistic  and  religious  studies     [150G-22 

io'uorant.  That  he  never  went  to  rest  at  night  without  having  read 
a"  little  in  his  master's  works,  as  he  said  in  a  letter  to  the  master  himself, 
may  Jiot  have  been  strictly  true  ;  but  the  dominant  influence  of  Erasmus 
upon  Zwingli,  never  overcome  although  combined  with  other  influences, 
admits  of  no  doubt.  He  may  also  have  learnt  from  Erasmus  something 
in  the  way  of  negation,  such  as  a  contempt  for  relics  ;  something,  too,  he 
may  have  learnt  from  Pico  della  Mirandola,  for  whose  sake  he  was  once 
called  a  heretic  at  Basel ;  but  from  anti-papal  tendencies  he  was  quite 
free.  From  this  young  humanist — paradoxically  combining  a  deep  sense 
of  responsibility  with  notable  laxity  in  his  moral  life  —  no  programme 
of  reform  was  as  yet  to  be  looked  for.  His  was  a  mind  that  moved 
gradually  towards  its  fuller  plans,  and  needed  a  fitting  field  wherein 
to  work. 

In  1513  he  had  again  taken  up  the  study  of  Greek,  in  which  a  little 
later  Bombasius  became  his  teacher ;  and  he  went  to  the  New  Testament 
itself  rather  than  to  any  commentaries ;  the  Fathers  however  attracted 
him,  and  it  was  at  Glarus  that  he  read  Jerome  (to  whom  Erasmus  could 
not  fail  to  send  him),  Augustine,  Origen,  Cyril,  and  Chrysostom.  Of 
all  these  Augustine  was  his  favourite  —  a  fact  to  be  noted  in  discussing 
his  theology  ;  but  he  considered  the  Greek  Fathers  to  be  more  excellent 
in  their  Christology  than  were  the  Latin.  HebreAv,  possibly  begun 
before,  was  studied  later  at  Zurich  in  1519  or  1520,  but  needed  a 
renewed  effort  in  1522.  He  ever  insisted  upon  the  need  of  a  learned 
clergy,  and  studied  Holy  Writ  as  he  had  learned  to  study  the  classical 
writers  —  a  method  which  lent  freshness  to  his  teaching,  but  laid  him 
open  to  a  charge  of  irreverence. 

Through  his  devotion  to  Erasmus  and  his  friendship  with  Heinrich 
Loriti  of  Glarus  (Glareanus)  Zwingli  gained  an  entry  into  the  world  of 
letters,  which  inherited  the  cosmopolitanism  of  the  medieval  universities, 
and  which  was  now  beginning  to  group  itself  around  presses  such  as 
Froben's  at  Basel  and  Froschauer's  at  Zurich  (1519).  This  was  of 
importance,  not  only  for  his  growing  reputation,  but  also  as  bringing 
him  into  touch  with  wider  interests.  In  his  later  years  of  diplomacy  the 
habit  of  correspondence  and  the  varied  associations  thus  formed  proved 
of  use.  Equally  important  too  was  the  skill  with  which  he  drew  around 
him  younger  men  —  some  to  find  their  goal  in  humanism,  some  in  religious 
reform ;  in  their  after  life  and  in  their  studies  (mainly  at  Vienna)  he 
followed  them  from  afar  and  regularly  wrote  to  them.  Thus  before  he 
founded  a  school  he  had  the  scholars  ready,  and  his  name  was  a  power 
among  the  younger  men. 

During  these  years  at  Glarus  he  became  entangled  in  that  system  of 
wars  and  pensions  which  was  the  glory  and  the  shame  of  his  fatherland. 
The  Italian  wars  brought  not  only  much  wealth  to  Switzerland,  but  also 
an  increase  of  territory.  To  keep  the  Swiss  as  allies  Louis  XII  had  (1503) 
surrendered  Bellinzona  to  them  ;  when  Massimiliano  Sforza  was  made 


1512-6]  Pensions  and  mercenary  service  309 

Duke  of  Milan  (1512)  they  received  from  him  the  Val  Maggia,  Locarno, 
and  Lugano,  while  the  Rhaetian  League  (the  Grisons)  gained  the 
Valtelline.  The  Swiss  Diets  were  besieged  by  agents  of  the  Powers. 
A  French  party  was  to  be  found  in  ever}^  town,  and  a  papalist  anti- 
French  party  was  created  by  Matthaus  Schinner,  Cardinal  of  Sion,  in 
the  service  of  Julius  II.  Zwingli's  interest  in  politics  was  great  ; 
politics  and  patriotism  inspired  his  earliest  German  poems,  the  Laby- 
rinth and  the  Fable  of  the  Ox  and  the  Beasts;  his  position  in  Glarus 
made  him  a  valuable  ally  for  the  papal  party  in  a  parish  where  the 
French  were  strong ;  it  was  therefore  natural — although  afterwards  made 
a  charge  against  him  —  that  he  should  accept  from  the  Pope  a  pension  of 
50  florins  (1512  or  1513)  ;  and  he  was  also  (August  29,  1518)  appointed 
acolyte  chaplain.  So  far  was  he  from  being  anti-papal  that  the  Papacy 
was  the  one  Power  with  which  he  held  it  right,  even  dutiful,  to  form 
alliances.  Twice  he  seems  to  have  gone  to  Italy  as  chaplain  with  the 
Glarus  contingent  ;  according  to  BuUinger  he  was  present  at  Novara 
(June  6,  1513)  and  at  Marignano  (September  13-14,  1515);  on  the 
latter  occasion  his  persuasion  kept  the  Glarus  men  faithful  to  their 
service  when  others  deserted  to  the  French.  Afterwards  he  indicates 
this  as  the  period  when  he  formed  his  well-known  views  upon  the  evils 
of  mercenary  service.  The  life  of  a  mercenary — in  camp  or  city  — 
destroyed  the  simplicity  endeared  to  Zwingli  by  the  earlier  Confederate 
history  and  classic  models. 

In  1515  the  papal  alliance  came  to  an  end :  the  terrible  experience 
of  Marignano  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  acquisition  of  teriitory  on  the 
other,  had  made  the  Confederates  desirous  of  peace,  and  (November  29, 
1516)  a  permanent  peace  was  made  with  France.  Zwingli's  opposition 
to  this  change  of  policy  made  his  position  at  Glarus  untenable,  and  he 
became  people's  priest  (or  vicar)  at  Einsiedeln  (April  14,  1516),  plac- 
ing a  vicar  at  Glarus.  Einsiedeln,  owing  to  its  renown  as  a  place  of 
pilgrimage,  combined  the  quiet  of  a  monastic  House  witli  the  traiTfic 
of  a  place  of  passage.  Here  he  carried  further  his  classical  studies  and 
increased  his  reputation  as  a  preacher  ;  he  carefully  trained  himself  in 
oratory  by  a  study  of  the  best  classic  models. 

The  personalities  of  the  three  great  leaders,  Erasmus,  Luther 
(to  whom  Zwingli  considered  he  was  prior  in  his  teaching),  and  Zwingli, 
were  very  different.  Luther,  with  his  monastic  training,  cared  little  for 
Catholic  organisation  ;  but  he  had  a  fervid  personal  experience  and  a 
strong  love  for  doctrine.  Erasmus  combined  piety  and  theological 
learning  with  much  freedom  of  speech,  tempered  by  regard  for 
authority  and  a  historic  sense.  Zwingli  had  from  the  first  no  regard 
for  authority  —  which  indeed  presented  itself  at  times  in  a  guise  hard  to 
respect  ;  he  belonged  to  a  country  peculiarly  weak  in  its  ecclesiastical 
organisation  and  abounding  in  clerical  abuses.  But  he  had  a  deep 
regard  for  learning  and  a  love  of  freedom,  personal  and  intellectual. 


310  Parochial  and  civic  influences  [i5i7-8 

He  had  no  vivid  perceptions  of  dogma,  recording  the  struggles  of  the 
soul.  But  he  learnt  from  his  varied  parochial  experience  to  realise 
keenly  the  relations  between  a  pastor  and  his  people.  He  had  no  deep 
philosophic  basis  for  his  opinions,  and  he  was  no  f ramer  of  theories ; 
he  ueecled  the  touch  of  actual  life  to  bring  his  powers  to  work,  and  he 
needed  a  field  that  suited  him  before  he  could  form  a  definite  polic}^ 
So  far  he  was  a  keen  Swiss  j)atriot,  with  that  love  of  the  past  that  had 
formed  the  legend  of  Tell,  a  humanist,  and  a  Reformer  of  the  type  of 
Erasmus,  if  indeed  he  was  a  Reformer  at  all. 

If  he  was  correct  in  his  own  view  of  his  mental  history,  he  took  up 
an  anti-papal  stand  from  the  first,  and  not,  as  Luther  did,  pressed  by 
the  course  of  ai'gument.  "  The  Papacy  must  fall,"  he  said  to  Capito  in 
1517.  But  the  humanists  had  inherited  something  of  scholastic  freedom 
in  discussion,  and  to  call  the  papal  authority  in  question  was  no  new 
thing  in  1517.  There  was  little  significance  in  this  expression  of  opinion 
from  one  who  held  a  papal  pension,  and  had  done  his  best  to  secure 
help  for  the  Papacy  in  what  many  of  his  friends  condemned  —  its  Italian 
wars  and  temporal  policy. 

After  refusing  one  post  at  Winterthur,  he  received  the  offer  of 
another,  that  of  people's  priest  at  the  Great  Minster  of  Zurich.  His 
reputation  as  a  preacher  was  in  his  favour  ;  the  new  Provost  of  the 
Chapter  —  Felix  Frei  —  had  humanistic  sympathies,  and  the  political 
views,  which  had  made  him  enemies  at  Glarus,  were  not  against  him 
here,  for  similar  views  had  friends  at  Zurich  ;  foreign  pensions  had  been 
forbidden  by  the  Pensionbrief  of  1503,  and  met  with  warm  opposition  in 
the  Chapter  ;  the  French  alliance  also  was  of  less  importance  here.  His 
appointment  was  preceded  by  much  negotiation ;  there  were  rivals,  and 
a  story  was  brought  up  to  his  discredit  which  he  could  neither  in  the 
main  deny,  nor  yet  adequately  defend  ;  indeed,  the  tone  of  his  defence 
showed  a  lack  of  moral  sense.  Finally  the  influence  of  his  friends, 
especially  of  Myconius  (Oswald  Geisshiissler),  schoolmaster  at  the  Min- 
ster school,  gained  him  the  election  (December  11,  1518),  17  out  of  a 
chapter  of  24  voting  for  him.  The  office  of  people's  priest  or  vicar  at 
the  Minster,  thus  gained,  he  kept  until  1522  ;  later  he  received  a 
prebend  after  he  had  resigned  his  papal  pension. 

Zwingli  had  thus  come  to  the  proper  field  of  his  religious  and  politi- 
cal work.  His  development  had  so  far  been  independent,  not  influenced 
even  by  Luther  ;  and  yet  the  movement  begun  by  Zwingli  owes  much  of 
its  importance  to  that  initiated  by  the  German  Reformer.  Their  likeness 
was  the  product  of  the  time  :  their  differences  were  not  only  doctrinal. 
Luther  was  no  humanist,  nor  did  his  work  lie  in  a  Swiss  city  or  in  tlie 
Swiss  Confederation.  The  special  type  of  Protestantism  presented  to  the 
Avorld  by  Zwingli  was  due  to  his  field  of  Avork  being  a  city  commonwealth 
with  a-  peculiar  history,  political  and  ecclesiastical.  But  the  ideas  with 
which  he  started  were  the  results  of  his  humanism  and  of  his  previous  work. 


1518]  Zwingli  at  Zurich  311 

First  among  his  ideas  comes  that  of  his  prophetical  office  :  he  had 
gained  his  experience  of  life  as  a  parish  priest  ;  his  heart  had  gone  into 
learning  and  education ;  these  factors  combined  to  form  his  vision  of 
a  prophet-pastor.  From  the  Old  Testament  he  took  the  notion  of  a 
prophet  teaching  morality,  and  not  shrinking  from  politics  where  they 
had  to  be  touched ;  but  he  added  to  this  the  ideal  of  instruction.  He 
thus  brought  to  his  new  work  the  loftiest  conceptions  of  spiritual 
authority  and  responsibility.  But  his  view  left  no  room  for  other 
authority  or  for  ecclesiastical  superiors.  The  prophet  was  to  do  his 
work  in  the  community, — not  the  community  of  the  congregation  regarded 
as  part  of  a  wider  Church,  but  the  political  community  in  which  he  lived. 
Preaching — for  which  his  life  and  training  fitted  him — was  to  be  the 
means  of  teaching  ;  it  was  well  adapted  for  influencing  a  democracy  and 
was  characteristic  of  liis  system,  where  the  pulpit  superseded  the  altar, 
and  where  the  intellectual  element  was  large. 

The  relation  of  the  prophet  to  his  community  was  tinged  by  the 
influence  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  affected  by  the  conditions  of  Swiss 
life.  It  was  the  prophet's  work  to  teach,  to  inspire  the  magistracy  ;  but 
it  was  theirs  to  carry  out  the  policy.  Thus  he  and  they  had  to  work 
together.  This  left  large  ecclesiastical  powers  to  the  community,  and 
such  the  city  had  already  claimed  for  itself ;  it  gave  wide  scope  to  the 
personal  influence  of  the  pastor,  both  over  the  political  assemblies  and 
over  the  burgesses  themselves.  The  acquisition  of  that  influence,  and  the 
full  use  of  it,  were  therefore  essential  to  Zwingli's  success. 

Zurich  had  grown  up  around  the  Great  Minster  and  the  Minster  of 
our  Lady,  foundations  of  Charles  the  Great  and  Ludwig  the  German 
respectively.  The  site  was  well  adapted  for  trade,  and,  between  the 
competing  jurisdictions  of  the  Abbess,  the  Provost  of  the  Great  Minster, 
and  the  Bailiff  of  the  Emperor,  a  peculiarly  free  development  was 
possible.  There  had  been  many  contests  between  the  city  and  its 
clergy.  Arnold  of  Brescia,  whose  visit  left  traces,  had  sojourned  there 
(1140-5)  ;  the  liability  of  the  clergy  to  pay  taxes  had  been  discussed 
and  enforced.  As  a  rule  the  monasteries  were  not  only  assessed  for 
taxation,  but  subject  to  visitation  by  the  State  ;  and  one  of  the  few 
Federal  documents  that  went  into  detail  laid  down  the  subjection  of 
ecclesiastics  to  all  ordinary  jurisdiction  (the  Pfaffenbrief  oi  1370). 

Swiss  histor}^ — apart  from  legend — had  been  so  far  singularly  poor 
in  individual  types.  The  most  striking  exception  was  that  of  Hans 
Waldmann,  who  had  left  a  conspicuous  mark  on  the  constitution  of 
Zurich.  In  1483  he  became  Burgomaster,  and  for  some  years  stood 
out  as  the  leading  statesman  in  Switzerland  ;  foreign  Powers  gave  him 
gifts  and  negotiated  with  him  as  with  a  prince.  Though  he  was  op- 
posed by  the  aristocrats,  he  succeeded  in  carrjdng  out  a  constitutional 
reform,  excellent  for  the  city,  but  stringent  and  oppressive  for  the 
surrounding  villages. 


312  Civic  and  religious  position  in  Zurich  [i5i8 

Up  to  this  time  the  Constafel,  the  original  citizens,  knights,  mer- 
chants, and  men  of  independent  means,  had  been  the  leading  element  in 
the  constitution.  Rudolf  Brun  (1336)  had  placed  the  Gilds  of  hand- 
workers, 13  in  number,  afterwards  12,  alongside  of  the  Constafel: 
their  Masters  became  members  of  the  smaller  Council  along  with  other 
Councillors,  elected  variously.  At  the  head  of  the  Constitution  stood 
the  Burgomaster,  and  for  special  purposes  the  Great  Council  of  200 
(exactly  212)  was  called  together.  Waldmann,  whose  sympathies  were 
with  the  Gilds,  gave  them  more  power  in  the  constitution,  and  reduced 
the  direct  representation  of  the  Constafel  in  the  Smaller  Council  from  12 
to  6.  These  civic  regulations  were  confirmed  even  by  his  enemies  after 
his  execution  ;  but  discontent  was  caused  by  his  strict  enactments  about 
trade  and  agriculture  which  weakened  the  country  for  the  good  of 
the  city ;  the  ill-wdll  thus  caused  led  to  the  riots  preceding  his  death 
and  left  their  mark  behind.  In  the  end  the  villages  gained  through 
the  mediation  of  the  other  States  an  organisation  (^G-emeinde)  of  their 
own,  through  which  they  could  act  and  consult  with  Zurich. 

Waldmann  claimed  for  the  city  the  right  to  legislate  for  the  Church, 
and  to  regulate  the  life  and  demeanour  of  ecclesiastics,  and  thus  gave 
an  impluse  to  the  ecclesiastical  independence  of  Zurich,  alread}^  con- 
siderable. A  document,  dating  from  1510  and  often  wrongly  termed  a 
Concordat,  summed  up  the  ecclesiastical  powers  claimed  by  Zurich  and 
permitted  to  her  by  the  Pope,  anxious  for  such  a  useful  ally.  The 
diocesan  divisions  of  Switzerland  corresponded  to  no  national  limits  and 
were  included  in  different  provinces —  Constance  and  Cliur  under  Mainz, 
Basel  and  Lausanne  under  Besangon,  and  Sion  under  Tarantaise,  until 
freed  by  Leo  X  from  its  dependence.  The  Bishop  of  Constance,  in 
whose  diocese  Zurich  lay,  was  not  well  placed  to  assert  his  authority 
in  this  powerful  city,  and  had  seen  many  of  his  rights  as  to  jurisdiction 
and  appointments  superseded. 

When  Zwingii  went  to  Zurich,  he  therefore  found  a  city  democratic 
in  its  institutions  (more  so,  for  instance,  than  Bern),  where  a  capable 
orator  and  man  of  affairs  would  be  able  to  come  to  the  front  speedily  ; 
its  history  had  made  its  relations  with  th-e  Papacy  and  the  Bishop 
mere  matters  of  policy ;  the  Church  had  as  against  the  State  little 
independence  of  its  own,  and  there  was  no  traditional  dislike  of  change. 
For  such  a  community  he  was  well  fitted  :  the  political  questions  to 
which  he  had  given  most  thought  were  those  upon  which  opinion  at 
Zurich  was  already  divided  ;  his  power  of  speech,  carefully  trained  and 
developed,  could  easily  gain  him  power  in  a  city  with  some  7000 
burghers,  and  by  his  expositions  on  market-days  he  was  able  also  to 
gain  influence  over  the  country  people. 

Zwingii  found  also  in  the  press  a  helpful  ally ;  the  printer  Froschauor 
was  one  of  his  closest  adherents ;  his  writings,  which  bear  the  mark  of  ex- 
tempore utterance  rather  than  of  careful  preparation,  were  often  intended 


1519-24]  ZwingWs  marriage. — Indulgences  313 

for  the  press,  and  spread  through  its  channels  of  trade;  letters  could  be  sent 
and  received  through  the  same  means,  for  the  printer's  house  was  a  centre 
of  news  and  communication  :  Froschauer,  for  instance,  had  a  branch 
establishment  at  Frankfort  and  could  circulate  Zwingli's  writings  easily 
and  carry  his  letters  for  him.  The  effect  of  Zwingli's  works  —  hastily 
written  for  the  most  part,  rarely  classic  in  form  or  of  permanent 
value  for  thought  —  was  often  immediate  and  great  ;  he  was  a  religious 
pamphleteer  of  learning,  vigour,  and  experience. 

In  his  private  life  there  are  few  dates  of  importance.  He  was  attacked 
by  the  plague  (September,  1519),  to  meet  which  he  had  courageously 
returned  from  a  holiday  ;  but  there  are  no  reasons  for  regarding  this 
illness  as  a  religious  crisis  in  his  life.  His  marriage  with  Anne  Reinhard, 
widow  of  Hans  Meyer  of  Knonau,  son  of  a  distinguished  family,  took 
place  (April  2,  1524)  after  a  dubious  connexion  of  some  two  years,  and 
was  hailed  by  some  of  his  friends  as  a  tardy  though  welcome  act  of 
courage.  By  the  end  of  1525  his  Reformation  at  Zurich  was  in  effect 
completed ;  and  from  that  time  onward  his  activity  was  either  political 
or  directed  against  Anabaptist  enemies. 

In  February,  1519,  the  Franciscan  Bernardin  Samson,  who  had  pre- 
viously encountered  Zwingli  at  Einsiedeln,  reached  Zurich  to  preach  his 
Indulgence.  Zwingli  opposed  him  at  once  and  with  success  ;  the  Bishop 
of  Constance  forbade  the  clergy  of  the  diocese  to  admit  Samson  into 
their  churches  ;  the  Council  of  Zurich  forbade  his  entry  into  the  city. 
But  Zwingli  and  Luther  met  with  very  different  treatment :  Samson  was 
ordered  by  the  Pope  himself  not  to  vex  the  authorities  of  Zurich,  and 
rather  than  do  so  to  depart ;  no  breach  between  the  Papacy  and  Zwingli 
resulted  ;  a  monk  who  wished  to  print  abuse  of  him  was  checked  by  both 
Legate  and  Bishop.  The  first  sign  of  anti-papal  feeling  upon  his  part 
comes  after  the  Imperial  election  (January-June,  1519).  The  papal 
policy  in  that  matter  was  too  shifty  to  commend  itself  to  Zwingli's  honest 
and  outspoken  nature,  and  moreover  he  wished  the  Swiss  to  stand  aloof. 

But  the  Lutheran  drama  had  by  this  time  come  to  a  crisis,  and 
following  the  advice  of  friends,  Beatus  Rhenanus  among  them,  Zwingli 
had  interested  himself  in  Luther's  fate  ;  after  the  Leipzig  disputation  he 
hailed  him  as  "  David  "  and  "  Hercules,"  and  exerted  himself  to  delay 
the  publication  of  the  Papal  Bull  against  him.  At  this  time  too  he  read 
Hus'  work  On  the  Church.,  which  is  practically  a  new  edition  of  Wiclif's 
De  JEcdesia,  and  contains  many  of  the  doctrines —  such  as  those  touching 
the  papal  power,  and  the  civil  right  to  control  the  Church  —  afterwards 
taught  by  Zwingli. 

The  question  how  far  Zwingli  was  indebted  to  Luther  has  been  much 
discussed.  Like  Luther,  he  had  been  called  a  heretic  after  his  opposi- 
tion to  Samson.  To  him  as  to  others  the  name  Lutheran  was  carelessly 
given.  His  private  Biblical  annotations  show  new  doctrinal  tendencies 
after  1522,  when  he  had  undoubtedly  read  Luther's  works.     But  the 


314  Relations  to  Luther  and  Erasmus  [  1519-23 

assumption  that  he  owed  his  views  to  Luther  always  roused  his  indig- 
nation, and  a  common  Pauline  element  fully  explains  the  likeness  of  their 
opinions,  slight  as  it  is.  Zwingli  tried  to  clear  himself  from  the  charge 
of  imitation,  and  claimed  for  himself  originality.  In  doing  so  he  was 
justified,  though  his  treatment  of  the  charge  shows  some  petulance  and 
self-satisfaction.  But  it  is  too  much  to  say  that  the  bold  stand  made 
by  Luther  and  the  whole  set  of  problems  he  raised  had  no  effect  upon 
Zwingli's  mind  and  did  nothing  to  direct  his  activity  into  new  channels. 
Their  original  impulses,  however,  were  very  different,  and  their  several 
treatment  of  Indulgences  illustrates  the  difference.  To  Luther  the 
question  presented  itself  as  a  mistaken  doctrine  which  struck  at  the  root 
of  religion  ;  to  Zwingli  it  was  more  a  practical  abuse,  an  encroachment 
of  the  Church  upon  the  individual  life. 

The  divergence  of  Zwingli  from  Erasmus  and  its  occasion  are  also 
instructive.  Hutten,  in  his  energy  and  contempt  for  tradition,  his 
licence  and  disregard  of  morality,  had  little  in  common  with  Erasmus  on 
the  one  hand  or  with  Luther  on  the  other,  although  his  love  of  learning 
and  width  of  outlook  joined  him  to  both.  Before  his  death,  however, 
in  August,  1523,  a  quarrel  with  Erasmus  brought  out  the  fundamental 
opposition  between  them.  Zwingli,  linked  to  Erasmus  by  early  in- 
debtedness and  a  scholar's  reverence,  had  yet  more  in  common  with 
Hutten ;  and  when  the  dying  outcast,  disowned  by  the  calmer  souls, 
reached  Zurich,  Zwingli  befriended  him  ;  he  did  this,  not  from  mere 
human  sympathy,  but  also  from  the  feeling  of  a  common  cause  against 
the  old  society  and  the  old  traditions.  But  his  action  caused  a  breach 
betvv^een  him  and  Erasmus,  and  with  Glareanus  also,  "the  shadow  of 
Erasmus."  This  marks  a  certain  separation  of  Zwingli  from  the  aims 
of  the  humanist  circles  in  which  he  had  hitherto  lived  ;  for  Basel  and 
Einsiedeln,  unlike  Luzern,  were  both  centres  of  learning. 

In  his  sermons  Zwingli,  who  was  both  outspoken  and  effective,  attacked 
monasticism  and  the  doctrines  of  Purgatory  and  the  Invocation  of  Saints. 
But  the  first  confl^ict  took  place  when  he  attacked  the  principle  of  tithes. 
In  a  Latin  sermon  preached  before  the  Chapter,  he  maintained  that  tithes 
had  no  foundation  in  the  Divine  Law,  and  should  be  voluntary.  The 
Provost  urged  him  in  vain  to  recant,  and  not  to  furnish  arms  for  the 
laity  to  use  against  the  clergy(early  in  1520).  The  same  year  a  simpli- 
fication of  the  breviary  for  the  Minster  was  prepared  and  introduced 
(June  27,  1520)  —  a  change  arising  out  of  Zwingli's  earlier  liturgical 
studies,  and  showing  that  the  majority  of  the  Chapter  was  on  his  side. 

Religious  parties  were  already  forming  themselves  around  him.  He 
met  with  opposition  both  from  the  conservatives  in  the  Chapter  (includ- 
ing Conrad  Hoffman,  who  had  supported  his  election)  and  from  the 
monks.  Tlie  excitement  raised  was  shown  by  a  decree  of  1520,  ordering 
priests  in  town  and  country  to  preach  conformably  to  the  Gospels 
and  Epistles  and  according  to  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the 


1521  ]  Mercenary  service. —  The  Papacy  315 

Bible,  but  to  keep  silent  upon  human  innovations.  This  decree,  proceed- 
ing not  from  the  Bishop  but  from  the  civil  rulers,  and  taking  the  Bible 
as  a  standard,  exhibited  two  characteristics  of  the  Zwingiian  position. 

The  political  events  of  these  years  were  decisive  for  Zwingli  and  for 
Zurich.  The  French,  at  a  Diet  held  at  Luzern  (May  5,  1521),  strove 
to  get  support  from  the  Confederates.  Pensions  had  already  done  much 
harm  to  social  and  political  life;  the  mercenary  soldiers,  whether  abroad 
selling  tlieir  lives  for  gold,  or  at  home  spending  it  in  riot,  were  an  injury 
to  the  State.  The  ostentatious  display  of  wealth  made  by  the  French 
envoys,  both  in  the  Imperial  election  and  now  in  their  search  for  an 
alliance,  emphasised  the  dangers  of  mercenary  service.  Zwingli,  together 
with  the  Burgomaster  Marcus  Roust,  opposed  the  French  alliance  ;  the 
Diet,  however,  made  a  treaty  with  Francis  I  by  which  he  might  enlist 
troops  up  to  16,000  under  leaders  of  his  own  choice.  The  Bernese 
statesrHan  Albrecht  von  Stein  came  to  Zurich  to  secure  its  approval ; 
for  the  city  with  its  villages  could  raise  an  arm}^  of  10,000.  But,  stimu- 
lated by  sermons  of  passionate  patriotism  from  Zwingli,  reminding 
them  again  and  again  of  their  hard-bought  freedom  and  traditional 
simplicity,  the  Zurich  Council  rejected  the  French  alliance.  The  Council 
of  the  Two  Hundred  answered  to  the  Diet,  that  they  would  keep  to 
their  old  leagues,  and  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  Princes,  pensions, 
and  foreign  alliances  ;  and  the  Pension  decree  which  forbade  the  receipt 
of  any  alien  gifts  was  to  be  sworn  to  by  all  the  citizens  twice  a  year.  But 
the  loss  of  wealth,  the  separation  from  the  other  Cantons,  and  the 
comparative  stagnation  of  neutral  life  soon  caused  discontent  in  the 
Corinth  of  Switzerland  ;  and  Zwingli  had  to  bear  many  reproaches. 
About  this  time  he  resigned  his  papal  pension  from  conscientious 
scruples,  but  soon  after  received  a  canonry  in  the  Minster  with  a  prebend 
of  10  gulden;  this  benefice  gave  him  the  franchise,  and  from  this  time 
his  political  importance  grew.  He  was  now  the  centre  of  a  growing 
group  ;  Berthold  Haller  at  Bern,  Vadian  (von  Watt),  the  gifted  Burgo- 
master of  St  Gallen,  and  others  ;  the  humanistic  brotherhood  was  passing 
into  a  Reforming  society,  and  was  soon  to  be  used  as  a  diplomatic  power. 

Zwingli's  defection  from  the  Papacy  was  now  only  a  matter  of  time. 
An  incident  often  assigned  as  its  cause  was  even  more  important  for 
Zurich  than  for  him.  The  Pope  asked  for  a  force  to  be  used  only  for 
the  defence  of  his  States,  not  against  the  French  or  other  Swiss.  Zurich, 
which  sent  him  half  his  body-guard,  was  the  place  where  he  sought  it. 
Zwingli,  who  had  once  before  supported  a  papal  application,  now 
opposed  it.  But  a  force  of  6000  set  out  (September  16,  1521)  and  was 
in  the  end  sent  to  Milan.  The  Council  indignantly  recalled  it ;  but 
some  of  the  soldiers  followed  Cardinal  Schinner,  and  narrowly  escaped 
a  conflict  with  the  Swiss  mercenaries  of  France.  To  make  things  worse, 
their  pay  was  withheld  even  after  their  return.  The  Council,  supported 
by  popular  feeling,  now  forbade  all  foreign  service  (January  11,  1522). 


316  Lenten  observance. — Archeteles  [1522 

This  same  year,  the  question  of  Lenten  observance  began  the 
Zwinglian  Reformation.  Some  of  Zwingli's  followers  did  not  share  his 
wilhn'gness  to  wait  for  the  action  of  the  magistracy.  The  printer 
Froschauer  and  others  ate  meat  publicly,  in  the  presence  of  Leo  Jud 
and  Zwingli  himself.  They  could  justify  themselves  by  his  teach- 
ing that  nothing  not  commanded  by  Scripture  was  binding  upon 
Christians,  and  he  undertook  their  defence.  His  sermon  On  the  Choice 
or  Freedom  of  Food  was  preached  now  (March  30, 1522)  and  afterwards 
printed,  as  were  many  of  his  sermons  delivered  about  this  time.  He 
advocated  freedom  for  the  individual,  upon  whom  lay  the  responsibility 
to  act  without  scandal. 

The  civic  authorities  made  a  compromise  :  no  distinction  was  drawn, 
they  said,  by  the  New  Testament  between  kinds  of  food  ;  but  for  the 
sake  of  peace  the  old  rule  should  be  kept  until  changed  by  authority, 
and  the  people's  priests  were  to  check  the  people  from  any  breach  of 
this  ruling.  The  disregard  of  custom  and  authority  shown  by  the 
decree  and  the  act  leading  to  it  could  not  be  overlooked  ;  and  the  Bishop 
of  Constance  sent  a  commission,  consisting  of  his  Suffragan  (Melchior 
Wattli)  and  two  others,  to  settle  the  matter.  The  commissioners  laid 
their  views  before  the  priests  and  the  Smaller  Council,  and  commanded 
them  to  observe  existing  customs  (April  7,  1522).  Before  the  Great 
Council  Zwingli  answeredthe  Suffragan's  arguments,  and  the  debate  really 
turned  upon  Church  autliority  and  custom  as  against  individual  freedom. 
At  its  close  the  Council  repeated  its  old  decree,  pending  a  settlement  by 
the  Bishop  of  Constance,  which  they  begged  him  to  make  according  to 
the  law  of  Christ.  This  was  a  practical  abrogation  of  episcopal  power, 
for  the  Bishop's  standing  was  clear.  The  Zwinglian  Reformation,  there- 
fore, begins  as  an  ecclesiastical  revolution,  founded  on  action  rather  than 
doctrine,  by  which  a  city  freed  itself  from  outward  control  and  organised 
itself  afresh. 

His  learned  friend  Johann  Faber,  the  Vicar-General  of  Constance, 
afterwards  an  Aulic  Councillor  and  a  leading  ecclesiastic,  had  just 
returned  from  a  visit  to  Rome  (May,  1522)  and  thenceforth  led  the 
opposition  against  Zwingli.  So  early  as  1519  the  latter  had  marked  him 
as  one  from  whom,  although  a  humanist,  the  Gospel  had  little  to  hope. 
Zwingli's  literary  work  at  this  time  recalls  that  of  Wiclif  in  the  years 
before  his  death  ;  his  Archeteles  —  a  full  statement  of  his  position  —  was 
written  in  haste  and  appeared  now  (August  22,  1522).  On  reading  it 
Erasmus  begged  him  to  be  more  cautious  and  to  act  with  others  ; 
Qi^colampadius  also  urged  restraint.  The  same  year  (July  2)  ten  priests 
joined  Zwingli  in  a  petition  to  the  Bishop  to  allow  clerical  marriage, 
wherein  the  wish  for  innovation  was  as  distinct  as  the  picture  of  existing 
morals  was  dark.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  priests  in  Switzerland, 
owing  partly  to  the  disorganisation  of  episcopal  rule  and  partly  to  the 
isolation  of  their  parishes,  had  a  low  standard  of  life  ;  of  this  there  is 


1522-3]  The  First  Disputation  317 

ample  evidence  from  both  episcopal  and  Reforming-  documents.  A  like 
request  made  to  the  Federal  Diet  (July  13)  was  accompanied  by  a 
repudiation  of  the  names  Lutheran  and  Hussites.  These  requests  had 
no  result  beyond  making  clear  the  position  of  those  who  preferred  them. 

At  Zurich  repeated  troubles  with  the  monks,  and  disturbances  during 
Zwingli's  sermons,  made  it  necessary  for  the  Burgomaster  to  restore 
order.  His  decree  —  this  time  coupled  with  no  appeal  to  the  Bishop  — 
was  that  the  pure  Word  of  God  must  be  preached,  and  the  Scholastics 
(a  term  loosely  used  for  teachers  held  to  be  old-fashioned)  left  alone. 
A  Chapter  (August  15)  of  the  country  clergymen  came  to  the  same 
decision.  Thus  backed  by  civic  and  clerical  authority,  Zwingli  held 
himself  free.  The  Bible  —  as  interpreted  by  the  responsible  "  Bishop  " 
(so  he  terms  all  pastors  and  indeed  in  one  place  all  humanists)  —  was  to  be 
the  sole  guide  of  faith.  City  and  country,  pastors  and  magistrates  were 
combined  into  a  stronghold  of  Reform.  The  system  thus  begun  may  be 
described  on  the  one  side  as  individualistic  and  on  the  other  as  civic. 
The  appeal  to  the  Scriptures  alone  was  individualistic,  due  to  humanism 
without  prepossession  ;  the  civic  element  was  due  to  the  circumstances 
of  Zurich. 

In  a  federal  republic  accustomed  to  Diets  a  Public  Disputation  — 
suggested  in  archeteles  —  seemed  a  likely  way  to  settle  controversies. 
It  recalled  at  once  University  exercises  and  General  Councils ;  it  was  at 
once  learned  and  democratic.  Such  an  assembly  was  called  at  the  end 
of  the  year,  and  met  in  Zurich  (January  29,  1523).  The  invitation  to 
this  Disputation  shows  the  Great  Council  for  the  first  time  definitely  on 
Zwingli's  side  ;  and  each  subsequent  stage  of  the  Swiss  Reformation  was 
marked  by  a  similar  encounter.  Zwingli  had  resigned  his  parochial 
charge,  but  had  been  allowed  by  the  Council  the  use  of  the  pulpit. 
In  the  Disputation  he  and  his  doctrine  were  the  central  points  of 
debate.     To  regulate  the  Disputation  he  had  drawn  up  67  theses. 

The  fundamental  conception  of  the  doctrine  here  set  forth  was  that 
of  the  Church  as  a  democratic  body  of  all  Christians,  each  in  open 
communication  with  God  independently  of  externals  or  means  of  grace, 
guided  by  the  study  of  Scripture  and  the  illumination  of  God's  Spirit. 
To  this  conception  the  republicanism  of  letters  and  of  Switzerland  had 
each  contributed  something.  Starting  from  this  assumption,  the  Theses 
place  the  Gospel  alone  as  the  basis  of  truth  and  the  secular  authority 
as  the  governor  of  the  organisation  ;  they  deny  the  power  of  Pope  and 
hierarchy,  the  sacrifice  in  the  Mass,  the  Invocation  of  Saints,  Purgatory, 
times  of  fasting,  and  clerical  celibacy. 

About  600  were  present  at  the  Disputation,  including  representatives 
of  the  Bishop  with  Faber  among  them  ;  Schaffhausen,  however,  was  the 
only  Canton  which  sent  deputies.  Faber  urged  the  postponement  of  a 
decision  until  the  expected  General  Council  met ;  but  Zwingli's  reply  was 
that  the  Word  of  God  was  the  sole  authority,  and  competent  scholars 


318  Social,  educational  and  religious  reform       [i523^ 

could  interpret  it,  so  that  there  was  no  need  of  a  Council's  decision. 
When  the  audience  met  after  dinner,  the  Burgomaster  Roust,  who 
presided,  declared  in  the  name  of  the  Council  that  Zwingli  had  not  been 
convicted  of  heresy,  and  therefore  ordered  that  he  should  go  on  preaching 
the  Holy  Gospel  with  the  Holy  Spirit's  help.  Zurich  was  thus  committed 
to  Zwingli,  and  the  importance  of  the  decision  was  shown  by  Faber's 
printing  his  own  account  of  what  took  place  as  a  correction  of  the 
Zurich  account.  The  First  Disputation  marks  Zwingli's  control  of 
the  city  as  established,  and  their  joint  complete  and  open  rupture  with 
the  past. 

Zwingli  was  now  sure  of  his  ground  and  could  proceed  more  rapidly: 
his  literary  activity  was  accompanied  by  practical  changes.  Leo  Jud  had 
translated  the  Baptismal  Office  into  German  and  used  it  (August  10, 
1523).  A  committee  was  appointed  to  deal  with  the  Minster  Chapter, 
for  which  a  new  constitution  was  issued  (September  29, 1523).  Fees  for 
Baptism  and  Burial  were  abolished  ;  holders  of  Minster  offices  were  to 
discharge  their  duties  to  the  utmost  of  their  health  and  strength ;  as  they 
died  off,  their  places  were  to  be  left  unfilled  (unless  chaplains  were  needed) , 
and  the  income  was  to  be  applied  to  other  purposes.  The  Chapter's 
fall  was  not  undeserved  ;  for,  though  there  were  some  excellent  members, 
it  had  become  a  refuge  for  men  of  good  family  and  poor  education. 
The  Bible  was  to  be  read  by  the  Minster  clergy  publicly  an  hour  a  day 
in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin,  with  explanations ;  free  lectures  and  fit 
lodgings  were  provided  for  candidates  for  the  ministry,  so  that  they 
need  no  longer  go  abroad.  The  public  lectures  were  the  origin  of  the 
later  "prophesying."  In  this  scheme  of  teaching  Zwingli  had  able 
helpers  in  Leo  Jud,  people's  priest  at  All  Saints  (1523),  and  Myconius, 
now  (1524)  at  the  Minster  school.  Zwingli  remained  faitliful  to  the 
principles  of  Erasmus,  and  never  fell  into  the  easy  error  of  underesti- 
mating education  as  compared  with  spiritual  zeal.  The  educational 
scheme  was  completed  for  Zurich  itself,  after  the  dissolution  of  the 
monasteries  which  followed  in  December,  1524.  What  remained  of 
the  Chapter's  income  when  education  had  been  provided  for,  went  to 
the  poor  and  the  aged  ;  in  his  poor-laws,  as  in  all  his  social  legislation, 
Zwingli  showed  a  clear  and  almost  modern  appreciation  of  needs  and 
methods,  notably  in  his  discouragement  of  mendicancy  and  use  of  careful 
enquiry. 

The  literary  side  of  Zwingli's  work  in  this  stage  was  the  Aushgung 
und  Begriindung  der  Schlussreden^  an  unsystematic  explanation  of  the 
Theses  for  the  Disputation.  The  work,  which  was  preceded  by  a  letter 
to  the  Council  and  people  of  Glarus,  was  a  full  and  in  parts  lengthy 
exposition  of  the  Theses  ;  written  in  German,  it  was  "  a  farrago  of  all 
the  opinions  which  are  controverted  to-day."  The  explanations  of  the 
Theses  upon  the  Papacy  and  the  Mass  are  especially  long,  which  is 
noteworthy,  as  Zwingli  had  as  yet  not  attacked  the  Mass  in  practice. 


1523]      Doctrine  and  observances. —  TJie  Anabaptists      319 

This  work,  written  night  and  day  amid  the  expectation  of  his  friends, 
and  incidentally  discussing  his  relations  with  Luther,  may  be  held  to 
contain  the  full  programme  of  the  Helvetic  Reformation  (July  14, 1523). 

Not  only  did  he  dislike  to  be  called  Lutheran,  but  on  some  points, 
such  as  Purgatory,  Confession,  and  Invocation  of  Saints,  he  differs 
from  Luther.  Against  the  monks  he  inveighs  strongly  :  all  monasteries 
ought  to  be  turned  into  hospitals.  The  Reformation  in  Switzerland 
made  most  way  where  there  were  many  monasteries,  and  least  where 
there  were  none  ;  the  differences  that  arose  between  the  larger  Houses 
and  their  tenants  made  the  latter  more  eager  to  embrace  Pro- 
testantism. And  the  secularisation  of  the  monasteries  —  here  laid  down 
as  desirable  —  was  a  very  practical  part  of  the  Swiss  Reformation:  the 
peasants  in  some  parts  undoubtedly  looked  for  profit  from  the  dissolution. 
Zwingli  also  explains  his  method  of  dealing  with  doctrine  ;  the  Invo- 
cation of  Saints  he  had  let  remain  until  the  populace  should  have  learnt 
to  do  without  it  and  worship  Christ  alone.  Confirmation  and  Extreme 
Unction  he  would  retain  as  rites,  not  as  Sacraments ;  but  Auricular 
Confession,  pictures,  and  music,  should  be  banished  from  churches. 

Zwingli  held  that  it  was  his  part  to  teach,  but  that  to  make  changes 
belonged  to  the  civic  authority.  But  his  teaching  had  led  some  of  his 
followers  to  act  without  waiting  for  the  civic  rulers;  pictures  and  images 
were  torn  down  both  in  town  and  countr3^  After  much  discussion  the 
(question  came  before  the  Great  Council,  which  suspended  judgment 
until  a  second  Disputation  should  be  held.  This  took  place  on 
October  26, 1523.  The  Bishops  and  the  other  Cantons  were  invited,  but 
the  Bishops  did  not  come  ;  800  persons,  350  of  them  ecclesiastics,  were 
present ;  this  time  St  Gallen  as  well  as  Schaffhausen  was  represented  ; 
Luzern  and  Obwalden  angrily  refused  the  invitation.  The  first  day's 
debate  was  upon  images  and  pictures,  which  Zwingli  held  forbidden  in 
all  cases  ;  some  urged  delay,  but  the  final  decision  was  that  idols  and 
pictures  should  be  removed,  but  without  a  breach  of  the  peace ;  those 
who  had  already  broken  the  peace  were  to  be  pardoned  as  a  rule,  but  a 
leader,  Nicholas  Hottinger,  was  afterwards  banished  for  two  years.  On 
the  second  day  the  Mass  was  discussed ;  Zwingli  had  prepared  Theses 
according  to  which  the  Mass  was  no  sacrifice  and  had  been  surrounded 
by  abuses.  But  the  appearance  in  this  Disputation  of  the  Anabaptists, 
an  organised  radical  party  basing  their  views  upon  his  teaching,  and  yet 
going  beyond  him  in  action,  hampered  him  greatly  and  made  the 
magistracy  cautious. 

At  the  Disputation  Zwingli  noted  in  a  formal  way  that  the 
ecclesiastical  authorities  had  done  nothing ;  this  was  true,  although  the 
Bishop  of  Constance  had  in  a  dignified  note  asserted  his  constitutional 
position  ;  he  could  not  appear,  and  he  begged  them  to  exercise  restraint. 
But  the  civil  authorities  were  now,  in  Zwingli's  view  and  in  their  own, 
called   upon    to   act.     A    commission   of   eight   members   of   the  two 


320  Division  in  the  Swiss  Confederation  [1523-4 

Councils  and  six  ecclesiastics  was  named  to  discuss  what  steps  should 
be  taken.  Until  a  settlement  the  clergy  were  to  be  instructed  by  an 
epistle,  which  Zwingli  was  asked  to  write  ;  preachers  were  also  sent  out ; 
Wolfgang  Joner,  Abbot  of  Kappel,  who  had  lately  called  the  younger 
BuUinger  to  his  help,  together  with  others,  visited  the  Canton  ;  Zwingli 
himself  went  in  the  direction  of  the  Thurgau.  The  Second  Disputation, 
wherein  discussion  turned  solely  on  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures, 
marks  a  fresh  stage  in  the  Reformation,  even  apart  from  the  appearance 
of  the  Anabaptists.  The  /Short  Introduction  to  Christian  Doctrine  (Eine 
kurze  christliche  Inleitmig}  is  its  literary  monument. 

Tlie  Reformation  was  now  no  longer  a  purely  civic  affair.  From  the 
first  the  Catholic  Cantons  had  been  indisposed  to  treat  it  as  such ; 
among  people  of  simple  minds  and  with  an  unformed  Federal  system 
religious  innovation  and  religious  discord  put  a  heavy  strain  both  upon 
Federal  action  and  other  bonds  of  union.  The  Federal  Diet  at  Baden 
(September  30, 1523)  had  threatened  all  innovators  with  punishment,  and 
Luzern  in  particular  had  shown  by  its  action  the  strength  of  its  feelings. 
The  Reformation  had  thus  already  divided  the  Confederation,  and  no 
Diet  had  been  held  at  Zurich  since  March,  1522  ;  the  union  of  the 
Cantons  before  this  time  had,  however,  been  so  loose  that  it  is  easy  to 
overestimate  the  retrograde  effects  of  the  Reformation. 

The  Introduction^  written  in  fourteen  days,  was  circulated  in 
November,  1523,  and  was  intended  for  the  clergy,  not  the  public.  It 
started  from  an  explanation  of  the  relations  between  the  Law  and  the 
Gospel,  passing  on  to  an  application  to  present  needs,  the  question  of 
images,  and  that  of  the  Mass.  Throughout  the  Canton  priests  here  and 
there  ceased  to  say  mass ;  when  Conrad  Hoffman  and  the  Catholics  of 
the  Chapter  complained,  the  Council,  advised  by  the  parish  priests,  for- 
bade them  to  speak  or  act  against  what  had  been  settled,  under  pain  of 
loss  of  their  benefices  and  banishment ;  at  Whitsuntide  a  full  settlement 
should  be  made  (January,  1524).  A  further  appeal  from  the  Catholic 
Cantons  to  abstain  from  innovations  (February  25,  1524)  only  called 
forth  the  answer  that  they  would  observe  the  Federal  League,  but  could 
not  yield  in  matters  of  conscience  (March  21).  For  Christmas  Day, 
1523,  Zwingli  had  announced  an  administration  in  both  kinds  at  the 
Cathedral,  and  the  substitution  of  a  sermon  for  the  daily  mass.  The 
Council,  however,  decreed  that  until  Whitsuntide  old  Mass  and  new 
Administration  should  continue  side  by  side.  Images  and  crucifixes  — 
the  use  of  which  had  been  quietly  checked  for  some  time  —  were  on  no 
account  to  be  carried  about.  The  exact  form  of  the  substitute  for  the 
Mass  was  to  be  settled  at  a  fresh  Disputation  (December  19,  1523). 

When  Whitsuntide  came  (May  15,  1524)  the  Council  resolved  to  act 
on  its  own  authority  without  waiting  for  the  Bishop.  The  committee 
appointed  in  1523  suggested  the  removal  of  pictures  and  images  by 
legally  named  authorities  at  the  wish  of  each  community,  and  Zwingli 


1524-5]      Abolition  of  the  Mass  and  the  moiiasteries         321 

urged  the  replacing  of  the  early  Mass  by  a  sermon  and  the  Lord's 
Supper.  The  committee,  however,  did  not  altogether  follow  him 
as  to  the  Mass ;  this  was  left  in  use,  but  the  images  were  removed. 
The  tardy  intervention  of  the  Bishop,  defending  the  Mass  and  images, 
was  disregarded.  This  decision  was  adopted  by  both  Councils  and  sent 
round  to  the  bailiffs  in  the  country  for  execution  (June-July).  The 
majority  of  a  village,  however,  could  decide  to  keep  or  remove  images 
as  they  pleased.  Removal  was  to  be  carried  out  by  the  pastor  and 
responsible  men ;  the  use  of  organs,  the  passing  bell,  and  extreme 
unction  were  also  abolished.  A  reply  to  the  Bishop  was  composed  by 
Zwingli,  who  was  now  all-powerful,  and  approved  by  the  Council.  The 
section  on  the  Mass  is  Zwingli's  first  complete  statement  of  his  views, 
which  he  was  now  developing.  He  carried  on  a  controversy,  partly  as  to 
this  subject,  with  Jerome  Emser  of  Leipzig,  who  had  attacked  Luther  for 
his  alteration  of  the  Canon ;  in  his  Antiholon  (August  18)  in  answer  to 
this  opponent,  in  an  Apology  addressed  to  Diebold  Geroldseck  (October 
9,  1523),  in  his  De  Canone  Missae  Ejnchiresis  (1523),  in  his  Suhsidium 
sive  Coronis  de  Eucharistia  (1525),  and  in  his  De  Vera  et  Falsa 
Religione  (1525)  Zwingli  dealt  with  this  central  point.  Negatively, 
he  repudiated  all  sacramental  efficacy,  and  reduced  the  rite  to  a  mere 
sign  Qnuda  signa)  :  positively,  he  laid  great  stress  —  notably  in  his 
reply  to  Emser  —  upon  its  aspect  as  a  feast  and  a  corporate  act ;  it  was 
therefore  social,  not  merely  individual  in  its  importance. 

The  Mass  at  Zurich  was  abolished  in  April,  1525,  but  the  religious 
Houses  had  been  previously  suppressed  ;  the  monks  who  did  not  return 
to  the  world  were  placed  together  in  the  Franciscan  monastery ;  the 
convent  of  the  Minster  of  our  Lady  (December  4,  1524)  and  the  Chapter 
of  the  Great  Minster  (December  20)  gave  up  their  possessions  to  the 
city;  the  monasteries  throughout  the  Canton  followed.  The  incomes 
were  devoted  to  education  or  the  poor ;  a  gymyiasium^  for  instance,  was 
endowed  with  the  funds  of  the  Great  Minster,  and  Zwingli  himself 
became  rector  of  the  Carolinum  (April  14,  1525)  as  the  united 
scholastic  foundations  were  called.  His  scheme  of  graduated  studies 
leading  up  to  the  ministry  was  adequate  and  well  thought  out.  By 
a  development  of  the  plan  of  Biblical  instruction  begun  in  1523  the 
prophesyings  or  expositions  took  the  place  of  the  choir  services,  while 
the  linguistic  instruction  was  extended  (July  19,  1525).  When  a 
Synodal  organisation  (September  23,  1527)  and  Church  Courts  {Still- 
sfande}  for  discipline  and  marriage-cases  were  set  up  (Ma}^  10,  1525), 
the  Reformation  upon  its  constructive  as  well  as  its  destructive  side  was 
completed.  As  a  purely  civic  organisation  even  in  its  details  it  was 
systematic  and  orderly :  a  register  of  baptisms,  for  instance,  was  begun 
in  1526  for  the  city  and  afterwards  extended  to  the  Canton.  Of  the 
elaborate  system  thus  established  Zwingli  was  the  "Bishop"  and  the  soul. 

It  seems  strange  to  find  the  Council  at  this  date  (August  19,  1524) 

C.  M.    H.    II.  21 


322  ZwingWs  supremacy  in  Zurich  [i524-9 

writing  to  the  Pope  that  they  were  unable  to  stop  tlie  course  of  change, 
even  had  they  wished,  owing  to  the  strength  of  popuhar  opinion.  The 
Pope's  reply  Avas  conciliatory,  and  prolonged  negotiations  took  place 
(1525-6)  ;  the  city  trying  to  obtain  the  arrears  of  its  military  pay,  and 
Clement  VII  seeking  to  keep  the  city  firm  in  its  old  alliance.  In  no 
respect  were  the  positions  of  Luther  and  of  Zwingli  more  contrasted 
than  in  the  treatment  they  received  from  the  Papacy ;  and  the  cause  of 
this  was  the  papal  hope  of  help  from  Zurich. 

The  civic  position  of  Zwingli  was  now  significant.  Theoretically  he 
might  consider  the  congregation  the  ecclesiastical  power,  but  in  practice 
the  community  acted.  He  had  realised  his  conception  of  the  prophet 
guiding  the  community  ;  nay  more,  he  was,  as  Salat  says,  "  Burgomaster, 
secretary,  and  Council  in  one."  First  the  Great  Council,  the  democratic 
body,  had  been  won,  then  the  Smaller  Council,  and  finally  events  gave 
Zwingli  even  further  power.  Marcus  Roust  and  Felix  Schmid,  the 
experienced  Burgomasters,  had  died  (1524)  ;  Joachim  amGriit,Zwingli's 
opponent  in  the  debates  upon  the  Mass  (1525),  had  been  dismissed 
from  his  office  of  city  clerk  (end  of  1525).  Zwingli  was  the  sole  leader 
left.  At  a  threatening  crisis  (November  20,  1524)  the  Burgomaster 
and  the  chief  Gild-master  received  authority  to  settle  pressing  business 
privately  with  the  help  of  trusty  men.  This  is  the  first  appearance  of 
the  Privy  Council  in  and  through  which  Zwingli  afterwards  worked,  and 
to  which  foreign  affairs  were  mainly  entrusted.  The  experience  of  the 
Peasants' War  (1524-5)  inclined  Zwingli  to  a  body  less  democratic  than 
a  large  assembly,  and  his  polic}^  often  required  secrecy.  Through  this 
body,  the  Heimliche  Rath,  or  the  Privy  Six,  which  became  permanent  in 
1529,  Zwingli  exerted  his  influence.  The  Council  itself  was  "purged" 
by  the  exclusion  of  those  opposed  to  him  (December  9, 1528),  Avho  were 
found  chiefly  among  the  nobles.  The  numbers  representing  the  Constafel 
in  the  two  Councils  were  reduced,  from  6  to  3,  and  from  18  to  12, 
respectively  (1529) .  Thus  beyond  the  Protestant  democracy  and  the  two 
Councils  stood  the  commanding  personality  of  Zwingli,  working  through 
and  upon  each  of  them,  but  above  them  all,  through  the  Privy  Six. 

Zwingli  had  been  so  gently  treated  by  the  Pope,  and  his  career  had 
been  so  fortunate,  that  his  conflict  with  the  Anabaptists  might  well 
seem  to  him  the  hardest  struggle  undergone  by  him.  The  leaders  of  that 
party  had  been  among  those  who,  by  eating  flesh  in  Lent,  began  the 
breach  with  episcopacy.  They  and  their  followers  pulled  down  crucifixes 
l)efore  the  State  had  legalised  such  acts  ;  but  they  could  appeal  to 
Zwingli's  teaching.  They  first  appear  as  a  distinct  party  in  the  Second 
Disputation  (October,  1523).  Conrad  Grebel  —  son  of  Jacob  Grebel, 
executed  November,  1526,  for  treason  —  and  Felix  Manz,  both  men  of 
influential  families  and  with  private  grudges  against  Zwingli,  were 
leaders  of  this  radical  party  in  the  city ;  outside  the  city  were  other 
local  centres  —  Zolliken,  Wyteken,  and  Hongg.     The  dislike  of  tithes  — 


1523-8]  The  Swiss  Anabaptists  323 

so  loudly  expressed  in  the  Peasants'  Revolt  —  was  shared  by  many 
Anabaptists ;  and  at  Griiningen,  a  centre  where  this  economic  side  of 
the  Anabaptist  movement  showed  itself,  it  united  with  that  of  the 
peasants.  Zwingii  himself  Avas  averse  from  levying  the  small  tithes 
upon  vegetables  and  fruit ;  he  held  further  that  tithes  had  merely  legal, 
but  no  Scriptural,  warrant.  The  Council,  however,  disagreed  with  him, 
and  tithes  were  maintained. 

At  first  the  movement  was  indigenous ;  but  late  in  1524  Miinzer  came 
to  Waldshut  (N.W.  of  Zurich),  and  Carlstadt  to  Zurich  itself;  some 
German  Anabaptists  from  St  Gallen  also  worked  in  Zurich  territory ; 
these  influences  from  outside  intensified  the  movement  and  organised  it. 
But  it  was  more  a  radical  than  a  doctrinal  movement ;  and  hence 
Zwingii,  jealous  for  the  unity  of  his  new  organisation  and  yet  largely  in 
sympathy  with  their  views,  appealed  to  the  Anabaptists  in  vain  not  to 
found  a  separate  body.  When  they  did  so,  a  public  Disputation  with 
them,  the  first  of  several,  was  arranged  (January  17-18,  1525),  and  it 
was  followed  by  a  decree  that  all  unbaptised  children  must  be  baptised 
within  a  week,  or  their  parents  would  be  banished.  Some  of  the  leaders 
were  imprisoned;  and  with  these  Zwingii  held  private  and  repeated 
discussions. 

Inasmuch  as  this  new  society  rejected  the  authority  of  magistrates 
and  pastors  alike,  the  Council  by  severe  punishment  tried  to  suppress 
the  movement.  Manz  was  put  to  death  by  drowning  (January  7, 1527), 
and  the  foreign  leaders  were  banished,  most  of  them  to  meet  violent 
deaths  later  and  elsewhere.  In  spite  of  Zwingli's  severity  against  them, 
due  to  his  resentment  as  a  rejected  leader,  whom  they  had  come  to 
hate  as  "the  false  prophet,"  their  small  congregations  continued  to 
exist.  Their  energy  afterwards  found  vent  in  needed  criticism  of 
clerical  life ;  and  the  Synod  of  Easter,  1528,  had  for  one  of  its  objects  a 
tightening  of  clerical  discipline  which  might  meet  the  objections  and 
gain  over  the  objectors. 

After  the  final  removal  of  the  Mass  the  radicals  turned  to  social 
matters,  and,  especially  at  Griiningen,  attacked  the  tithes.  An  agitation 
against  tithes  and  the  monasteries  had  to  a  great  extent  common  objects 
Avith  the  Zwinglians ;  the  houses  of  Riiti  and  liubikon  were  attacked  by 
rioters ;  and  a  popular  assembly  at  Toss  (June  5,  1525)  caused  great 
fear.  The  defeat  of  the  Peasants'  Revolt,  in  Germany  made  the  allied 
movement  easier  to  deal  with  in  Switzerland,  and  Zwingli's  negotiations, 
together  with  public  disputations,  resulted  in  a  settlement.  Tithes 
remained,  but  personal  servitude,  where  the  ownership  of  the  State  was 
concerned,  was  done  away  with.  The  villagers  of  the  lake  communes 
were  henceforth  regarded  as  citizens  of  the  town.  The  general  result 
here  as  in  Germany  was  to  arouse  a  dread  of  change  ;  and  outside  Zurich 
Zwingli's  teaching  was  greatly  blamed  as  an  exciting  cause.  Incidentally, 
the  vain  attempt  of  Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg  to  regain  his  duchy  by  the 


324  Tlie 'peasants. —  The  Subject  Lands  [1522-5 

help  of  the  peasants  and  Swiss  mercenaries  had  made  the  governments 
at  Ensisheim  and  Innsbruck  suspicious  of  Switzerhmd.  The  grievances 
of  the  peasants,  intensified  by  the  eilect  of  the  Reformation  upon  the 
public  lands,  remained  unredressed,  and,  a  century  later,  led  to  the 
Peasants'  War  (1653).  Few  chapters  in  the  history  of  federalism  are 
more  instructive  than  this  failure  on  the  part  of  a  democratic  federation 
to  govern  its  conquests  or  to  respect  their  liberties. 

The  Reformation  had  brought  a  new  cause  of  division  into  the  Con- 
federacy, Religious  disunion — save  in  the  occasional  form  of  heresy  — 
was  an  unlooked-for  thing,  and  the  Federal  authority  scarcely  knew  how 
to  treat  it.  The  Forest  Cantons  were  keen  enemies  of  change  ;  they 
regarded  the  Zurich  innovations  as  threatening  to  themselves.  On  the 
other  hand  Zurich  naturally  regarded  herself  as  free  to  make  what  changes 
she  wished.  This  difficulty  would  have  strained  Federal  relations,  espe- 
ciall}^  where  much  of  Church  government  had  been  already  taken  over 
by  the  civil  power  ;  but  it  might  have  been  overcome.  When  Zurich  — 
disregarding  the  principle  of  government  by  the  majority  of  the  Cantons 
—  pushed  religious  change  into  the  Subject  Lands  the  dilhculty  v/as 
increased.  The  frequent  division  of  the  higher  and  lower  jurisdiction 
between  the  Confederates  and  a  single  Canton  gave  rise  to  the  further 
question:  underwhich  jurisdictioncame  religious  offences?  The  majority 
of  the  Cantons  governing  the  Subject  Lands  were  Catholic ;  Zurich  in 
many  places  held  the  lower  jurisdiction.  As  early  as  November,  1522, 
the  Federal  Diet  ordered  the  bailiffs  in  the  Subject  Lands  to  bring  before 
them  the  priests  who  spoke  against  the  faith,  thus  claiming  religious 
offences  for  the  higher  jurisdiction.  But  these  beginnings  of  discord  in 
the  Federation  were  bound  up  with  the  beginnings  of  a  local  reformation 
upon  Catholic  lines. 

The  Bishop  of  Constance,  like  his  brother-Bishop  Christopher  von 
Uttenheim  of  Basel,  had  tried  to  improve  his  diocese,  as  his  pastoral 
letter  of  1517  shows.  With  these  efforts  there  was  widespread 
sympathy,  and  when  the  three  Bishops  of  Basel,  Lausanne,  and 
Constance  complained  to  the  Diet  at  Luzern  (January  26,  1524)  of  the 
disturbed  state  of  things  in  their  dioceses,  the  Diet  not  only  (as  already 
noted)  sent  an  embassy  to  Zurich  urging  caution,  but  proposed  to 
undertake  a  reformation  on  the  lines  of  unity,  admitting  that  abuses 
ought  to  be  redressed.  Exactions,  traffic  in  benefices.  Indulgences  were 
condemned;  the  Diet  would  consult  with  Zurich  as  to  the  best  means  of 
shaking  off  the  yoke  which  the  injustice  of  Popes,  Cardinals,  and  prelates 
had  laid  upon  the  Swiss  people.  But  this  reformation  w\as  to  be  under- 
taken by  the  State,  and  the  Federal  Diet  was  to  be  the  ruling  authorit}-. 
Nothing  could  better  prove  the  ecclesiastical  anarchy  into  which 
Switzerland  had  fallen,  and  the  chance  that  a  reforming  Papacy  would 
have  had  of  preserving  unity  and  yet  securing  progress.  Luzern,  whence 
these  proposals  came,  was  afterwards  a  centre  of  the  Counter-Reformation. 


1524-6] 


The  Catholic  Cantons.     Bern  325 


They  were  rejected  by  Zurich,  but  resulted  in  the  Disputation  at 
Baden  (May-June,  1526).  Zwingli,  however,  it  was  easy  to  see,  cared 
little  for  unity  or  peace,  compared  with  the  carrying  out  of  his  own 
far-reaching  plans. 

At  Beckenried,  April  8,  1524,  the  Five  Cantons,  Luzern,  Uri, 
Schwyz,  Unterwalden,  and  Zug,  formed  a  separate  league  to  suppress 
all  Hussite,  Lutheran,  or  Zwinglian  errors.  A  further  remonstrance  was 
made  to  Zurich  by  all  the  Cantons  except  Schaffhausen  and  Appenzell, 
and  the  intention  of  not  sitting  in  Diet  along  with  Zurich  was  declared 
(July  16,  1524).  The  Mass,  pictures,  images,  and  fasting  were  pro- 
nounced binding  upon  all  Swiss.  Zurich  on  the  other  hand  declared 
religion  to  be  a  purely  cantonal  matter.  This  was  a  question  hard  to 
settle,  with  no  precedents  to  refer  to.  Zurich,  however,  put  itself  in 
the  wrong  b}^  its  action  in  the  Thurgau,  where  it  held  the  lower 
jurisdiction,  exercised  through  its  bailiffs.  Preachers,  for  the  most  part 
connected  with  Zwingli,  had  worked  their  way  here — such  as  Oechsli(an 
old  Einsiedeln  friend  of  his)  at  Burg.  When  Oechsli  was  seized  by 
the  Federal  officer  who  exercised  the  higher  jurisdiction,  his  friends 
and  parishioners  gathered  to  rescue  him  (July  17,  1524)  :  afterwards 
in  a  riotous  mob  they  proceeded  to  the  Carthusian  monastery  of  Illingen, 
and  set  it  on  fire.  At  Stammheim  and  Stein  images  were  destroyed. 
The  seizure  of  the  leaders  —  three  of  whom  were  executed  at  Baden  — 
embittered  Zurich  ;  but  the  other  Cantons  in  their  turn  blamed  its 
encouragement  of  the  preachers. 

Six  Cantons  (Luzern,  Uri,  Unterwalden,  Schwyz,  Zug,  and  Freiburg) 
now  threatened  to  break  the  league  ;  but  Bern  was  inclined  to  support 
the  independence  of  the  Cantons,  upon  the  principle  cuju%  regio^  ejus 
religio.  At  a  Diet  at  Zug  it  was  proposed  to  raise  the  country  districts 
against  Zurich  on  account  of  her  destruction  of  images,  but  to  this  step 
Bern  and  Solothurn  objected.  Zurich  had,  however,  made  sure  of  the 
loyalty  of  her  subjects  in  the  religious  changes,  just  as  she  referred  to 
them  the  French  alliance  and  the  demands  of  the  peasants.  But  the 
Cantons  were  now  divided  into  hostile  factions  ;  and  outside  lay  Austria, 
embittered  by  the  help  sent  from  Zurich  to  a  rising  at  Waldshut  and 
Swiss  support  of  Duke  Ulrich. 

At  the  end  of  1524  Zwingli,  always  fertile  in  suggestions  and  skilful 
in  expression,  came  forward  with  a  remarkable  plan.  Zurich  was  to 
strengthen  herself  in  military  equipment  —  her  reputation  for  military 
strength  was  great ;  she  was  to  seek  alliances  with  France  and  Savoy  ;  to 
promise  St  Gallen  and  the  Thurgau  the  property  of  the  monasteries  in 
their  territory  as  a  price  for  their  support  ;  and  to  raise  Tyrol  against 
Austria.  It  is  clear  that  Zwingli's  range  was  extending  :  it  was  now 
that  he  entered  into  relations  with  Duke  Ulrich  ;  he  now  also  took 
the  religious  movement  in  his  old  home,  Toggenburg,  under  his  care, 
and  the  Reformation  was  soon  fully  under  way  (1524-5). 


326  Political  schemes  of  Zivinyll  [i524-6 

The  disaster  of  Pavia  (February  24,  1525)  wrought  some  change  in 
Federal  feeling  ;  the  loss  of  5000  Swiss,  followed  by  the  retreat  of  the 
remainder,  made  the  P'rench  alliance  less  popular  ;  people  freely  cursed 
the  French,  pensions,  and  subsidies.  Thus,  Z  wingli's  old  policy  of  doing 
away  with  mercenary  service  was  recommended  ;  but  he  had  now  departed 
from  his  former  dislike  of  alliances.  An  alliance  with  France  was  soon 
one  of  his  dearest  hopes  ;  his  work  at  Zurich  was  safe  ;  to  make  Protes- 
tantism in  the  Common  Lands  equally  safe,  and  afterwards  to  gain  freedom 
for  his  preachers  in  the  Catholic  Cantons,  were  now  the  objects  of  his 
policy.  To  carry  such  a  policy  iiito  effect  foreign  alliances  were  needed. 
But  nearer  than  France  lay  southern  Germany,  the  cities  of  whicli  were  in 
many  ways  more  like  Zurich  than  was  Bern,  and  here  his  doctrines  made 
rapid  way.  These  cities  were  naturally  inclined  to  an  organisation 
of  religion  that  was  at  once  civic  and  democratic  ;  Strassburg — with  its 
many  subject  villages —  was  a  mediator  by  position  and  interest ;  the  new 
diplomatists  were  the  preachers,  with  something  of  Zwingli's  influence  in 
their  respective  cities,  and  many  of  them  in  constant  correspondence  with 
him.  The  decentralising  of  influences  which  had  once  centred  in  Rome 
or  in  the  greater  ecclesiastical  Courts  ;  the  substitution  of  pastors  and 
dogmatic  leaders  for  Cardinals  and  Legates  —  these  are  leading  features 
of  Pteformation  politics.  Thus  the  main  interest  of  Zwingli's  letters  in 
the  following  years  is  political  and  di]3lomatic.  His  object  was  to  give 
Zurich  a  great  dominion  such  as  she  had  sought  and  lost  in  the  old 
Zurich  war,  to  make  her  the  Vorort,  no  longer  of  eastern  Switzerland 
only,  but  of  a  new  Confederacy  reaching  into  the  Empire  and  holding  at 
bay  the  Emperor  (of  whom  he  wished  to  see  the  world  well  rid).  But 
this  dominion  was  to  be  based  upon  a  common  religion. 

As  the  forces  of  religious  change  drew  togetlier,  so  did  the  forces 
of  conservatism.  Archduke  Ferdinand  had  gathered  the  leading  Catholic 
States  (June,  1526)  at  Ratisbon  ;  to  them,  as  to  the  Diet  at  Luzern, 
the  suppression  of  heresy  seemed  the  most  urgent  duty  ;  the  minor 
ecclesiastical  reforms  secured  from  the  Legate  Campeggio  fell  far  short 
of  the  Swiss  plan  of  reform.  Faber  had  been  at  this  conference  ;  in 
this  year  (1526)  he  became  an  imperial  councillor,  and  now  he  began  to 
organise  the  Catholic  party  in  Switzerland.  For  this  purpose  a  Disputa- 
tion was  suggested  at  Baden  (January  15,  1526)  ;  John  Mayer  of  Eck  — 
a  many-sided  and  able  man  —  was  eager  to  meet  Z  wingli.  But  the  latter 
at  flrst  declined  to  meet  him  anywhere  save  at  Zurich  ;  and  afterwards, 
when  Zwingli  was  ready  to  go  to  St  Gallen  or  Schaffhausen,  the 
Zurich  Council  refused  him  leave  for  the  journey.  When  the  meeting 
took  place  at  Baden  (May  21-June  18,  1526),  he  was  therefore  not 
present,  and  fficolampadius  from  Basel  had  to  take  his  place.  But  the 
most  elaborate  arrangements  were  made  for  sending  him  daily  reports 
and  receiving  his  advice.  Eck,  with  his  Theses,  plaved  the  part  that 
Zwingli  had  played  at  Zurich,  and  in  the  opinion  of  the  majority  (82  to 


1523-8]  Spread  of  the  Reformation  327 

20)  played  it  well.  The  reputation  of  the  victory  greatly  strengthened 
the  Catholic  party. 

But  Zurich  was  now  no  longer  the  sole  centre  of  Reform.  At  Schaff- 
hausen,  Hofmeister,  at  Biel,  Wyttenbach,  Zwingli's  old  teacher  at  Basel, 
were  preaching  freely.  In  Basel  Capito's  work  (1512-20)  was  more  than 
carried  onby  GEcolampadius,  now  (February,  1525)  minister  at  St  Martin's. 
Bern,  the  most  important  of  all  the  cities,  was,  in  religion  as  in  politics, 
inclined  to  a  policy  of  its  own.  Political  power  was  here  in  the  hands 
of  the  aristocracy,  the  gilds  being  politically  unimportant ;  Berthold 
Haller  and  Sebastian  Meier  by  their  preaching  shared  the  work  of  the 
painter-dramatist  Nicholas  Manuel,  to  whom  some  ascribe  the  direction 
of  Bernese  policy,  until  his  death  in  1530.  Free  preaching,  if  in 
accord  with  God's  Word,  was  allowed,  but  innovations  were  forbidden  ; 
pictures,  fasting,  and  other  points  disputed  elsewhere  were  left  untouched ; 
but  heretical  books  were  prohibited  (June  15, 1523  ;  November  22, 1524). 
The  magistracy,  however,  claimed  the  right  to  punish  priests  disregarding 
these  decrees  ;  the  monasteries  were  placed  under  civic  control,  and 
clerical  incomes  were  regulated.  But  the  power  of  the  preachers  grew  ; 
and  at  Easter,  1527,  both  the  Great  and  the  Small  Council  had  Protes- 
tant majorities.  A  decree  maintaining  the  old  worship  for  the  present 
with  a  speedy  prospect  of  change  was  passed ;  but  some  priests  here  as 
elsewhere  anticipated  the  change.  Political  interests  moved  Bern  in  the 
same  direction.  Although  disturbed  by  the  Peasants'  War,  Bern  was  still 
unwilling  to  put  pressure  upon  Zurich  ;  and  towards  the  end  of  1526, 
through  fear  of  Austria,  drew  nearer  to  her.  Bern,  Zurich,  Basel, 
Glaras,  and  Appenzell  did  not  share  the  desire  of  the  Catholic  Cantons 
to  base  their  Federal  union  upon  a  common  belief,  but  wished  to  found 
it  only  upon  common  interests. 

The  Bernese  authorities  decided,  like  Zurich,  to  hold  a  Disputation 
to  which  the  Bishops  and  delegates  from  the  Cantons  were  invited. 
Zwingli  came  with  the  Burgomaster,  Diethelm  Roust.  Here  (January  6, 
1528)  ten  Theses,  drawn  up  by  Zwingli,  Haller,  and  Roll,  were  debated. 
They  treated  of  the  Mass  as  a  sacrifice,  of  pictures,  and  of  Purgatory  ; 
the  validity  of  Church  ordinances,  except  when  grounded  upon  God's 
Word  was  denied.  Thesis  IV,  "that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are 
substantially  and  corporally  received  in  the  Eucharist  cannot  be  proved 
from  the  Scripture,"  caused  much  discussion.  The  Disputations  ended 
as  Zwingli  wished.  The  Mass  was  replaced  by  sermons  ;  images  were 
soon  removed,  and  even  the  Minster  organ  was  broken  up  (February  17, 
1528).  In  some  respects,  however,  Bern  did  not  follow  Zurich  ;  when 
the  latter  supported  by  force  the  Reformation  in  the  Thurgau,  Bern 
parted  company,  and  her  constant  fear  of  Savoy  led  her  to  look  more  to 
the  west  and  less  to  the  east  than  did  Zurich. 

The  Bernese  ^Reformation  was  less  doctrinal  than  the  Zurich,  but 
the  secularisation  of  the  monasteries  was  a  great  feature  in  its  case  also 


328     Bern  and  Basel ;   Constance  and  Strasshurg     [1527-8 

(1527)  ;  the  funds  so  derived  were  devoted  partly  to  the  State,  partly 
to  replacing  foreign  pensions,  which  were  now  definitely  renounced 
(February,  1528).  The  Bernese  Oberlanders,  however,  had  hoped  to 
share  the  property  of  the  monastery  at  Interlaken,  and,  when  this  was 
seized  for  the  government,  the  inhabitants  of  the  Haslithal  rose  in 
rebellion ;  some  citizens  of  Unterwalden,  believing  the  statement  of 
these  peasants  that  the  Reformation  was  forced  upon  them,  crossed  the 
Briinig  to  their  help,  and  it  cost  Bern  much  trouble  to  put  down  the 
movement  so  supported.  This  incident,  for  which  Bern  claimed  com- 
pensation, was  a  cause  of  much  ill-will. 

About  a  year  later  (February,  1529)  the  Reformation  was  carried 
through  at  Basel,  but  not  without  tumults  which  drove  Erasmus  away 
to  Louvain,  the  centre  of  the  Counter-Reformation.  Miihlhausen, 
Schaffhausen  (where  the  movement  was  democratic),  St  Gallen,  and  the 
Free  Bailiwicks  (especially  Bremgarten)  followed  in  the  same  direction  ; 
while  Appenzell  (the  outer  Rhodes  allowing  freedom  of  belief,  1524)  and 
Glarus  were  divided  ;  the  Graubiinden  —  where  opposition  to  the  Bishop 
had  long  existed — allowed  liberty  of  preaching  in  1526. 

But  Zwingli's  outlook  included  Germany  as  well  as  Switzerland ;  his 
doctrines,  opposed  to  those  of  Luther,  were  here  working  their  way 
inwards ;  and  therefore  the  relations  between  Emperor  and  Princes 
greatly  affected  him.  Constance,  always  hostile  to  the  Emperor,  and 
Lindau,  controlled  the  Lake  of  Constance.  In  the  former,  Protestant 
views,  taught  by  the  Swabian  Reformer,  Ambrose  Blarer,  a  friend  of 
Melanchthon,  and  Zurik,  had  such  hold  that  the  Bishop  (1526)  moved 
to  Meersburg,  and  the  Chapter  to  Ueberlingen.  The  Federal  Diet 
(November  4,  1527)  refused  to  admit  Constance  as  a  member  ;  but  on 
Christmas-day  the  Council  of  Zurich  decided  to  conclude  with  Constance 
a  religious  and  political  League,  called  das  christUche  Biirgerrecht.  The 
treaty  was  modelled  upon  that  which  had  admitted  Basel  to  the  Con- 
federates (June  9, 1501)  ;  it  contained  provisions  for  mutual  help,  mainly 
defensive  ;  it  allowed  of  extension,  and  indeed  the  conquest  of  lands  for 
Constance  is  spoken  of,  a  seeming  reference  to  the  Thurgau.  But  the 
peculiarity  of  the  new  Treaty  lay  in  its  being  based  upon  theological 
unity  —  a  principle  which  was  to  have  a  long  and  disastrous  future  in 
diplomacy.  To  Strasshurg  —  where  the  preachers  Capito,  Bucer,  and 
Hedio  were  already  his  friends —  Zwingli  sent  (August,  1527)  an  envoy 
to  discuss  its  admission  to  the  new  League  ;  the  admission  of  Bern, 
discussed  at  the  Bern  Disputation,  was  merely  a  question  of  time  ;  it 
followed  Constance  (June  25,  1528).  The  Reformation  in  the  Common 
Lands  was  now  a  pressing  question,  and  a  clause  in  the  Treaty  provided 
that  preachers  there  should  be  protected,  and  no  subject  punished  for 
his  belief ;  if  the  majority  anywhere  decided  for  Reform,  they  were  to 
be  left  free  to  carry  it  out.  The  first  place  to  which  this  applied  was 
the  Toggenburg,  Zwingli's  old  home. 


1527-30]  The  Christian  Civic  League  and  Christian  Union  329 

Other  cities  quickly  followed  :  St  Gallen  (November  3)  ;  Biel 
(January  28,  1529)  ;  Miihlhausen  (February  17)  ;  Basel  (March  3)  ; 
and  after  a  longer  interval  Schaffhausen  (October  15),  which  had  a 
somewhat  varied  religious  history.  Strassburg,  after  many  proposals 
and  discussions  (due  to  Bern's  unwillingness  to  pass  beyond  Switzerland), 
finally  entered  the  League  (January  5,  1530),  when  the  danger  from 
Austria  seemed  great,  and  Zwingli's  activity,  stimulated  by  Philip  of 
Hesse,  was  almost  feverish.  The  edifice  was  to  be  crowned  by  the 
admission  of  Hesse  ;  but  only  Zurich,  Basel,  and  Strassburg  would 
consent  to  so  risky  an  alliance  ;  and  in  the  various  treaties  concluded 
with  these  cities  the  claims  of  the  Swiss  Confederation  Avere  reserved. 
There  were  proposals  for  a  larger  league,  to  include  Augsburg,  Niirn- 
berg,  and  Ulm  ;  but  the  anomaly  of  such  a  formation  was  evident,  and 
it  could  not  be  successfully  carried  into  execution.  The  inclusion  of 
Ulrich  of  Wilrttemberg  in  the  Christian  Civic  League,  as  proposed  by 
Philip,  was,  happily,  not  brought  about.  The  result  of  the  diplomatic 
activity  in  which  Zwingli  had  engaged  under  the  influence  of  Philip  of 
Hesse  thus  fell  far  short  of  its  purpose. 

To  this  new  League,  which  made  the  Confederation  impossible,  the 
Catholic  States  replied  by  the  "  Christian  Union."  Austria  had  causes 
of  complaint  in  the  Waklshut  incident  and  in  the  monastic  secularisations. 
The  monasteries  of  Stein-am-Rhein  and  Konigsfelden,  the  former  being 
under  Austrian  protection,  and  the  latter  an  Austrian  foundation,  had 
been  secularised  (1524).  Ferdinand  protested ;  and  reprisals  followed  on 
both  sides.  For  its  Italian  policy  Austria  had  need  of  Swiss  support  (it 
was  hopeless,  said  one  Austrian  envoy,  to  hold  Milan  unless  Switzerland 
were  with  the  Emperor).  At  the  Diet  at  Baden  (May  28,  1528) 
Dr  Jacob  Sturzl,  an  envoy  from  Ferdinand  —  whose  policy  here  agreed 
with  the  Emperor's  —  proposed  to  the  Five  Catholic  Cantons,  Luzern, 
Schwyz,  Uri,  Unterwalden,  and  Zug,  a  league  with  Austria,  partly  for 
defence  and  common  religious  ends.  War  was  threatened  ;  for,  while 
the  Imperial  government  was  eager  to  attack  Constance,  Zurich  and 
possibly  Bern  were  equally  bound  to  defend  it,  and  also  to  chastise 
Unterwalden  for  violating  Bernese  territory. 

It  is  impossible  to  follow  in  detail  Austria's  policy  towards  Switzer- 
land :  distinctionsbetweenthe  policies  of  Charles  and  Ferdinand,  between 
the  Councils  at  Ensisheira  and  Innsbruck,  are  easily  traceable.  And  the 
chief  advisers  were  not  at  one.  Mark  Sittich  of  Ems  —  the  Vogtoi 
Bregenz  and  the  Vorarlberg — and  Count  Rudolf  von  Sulz,  head  of  the 
Innsbruck  Council,  were  for  war  ;  they  were  further  urged  on  by  the 
Bishop  of  Constance  and  the  Abbot  of  St  Gallen,  who  had  private  wrongs 
to  redress.  But  the  Habsburg  lack  of  funds,  and  the  impossibility  of 
putting  fresh  taxes  upon  impoverished  lands,  made  against  war.  The 
desirability  of  regaining  the  old  lands  of  the  Habsburgs  was  always 
present  to  their  advisers  ;  yet  little  could  be  done  to  compass  it.     On 


330  Diet  of  Speier.  — Imminence  of  war  [io28-9 

the  other  side  the  dread  of  such  an  attack  from  "  Pharaoli  "  was  always 
in  the  mind  of  Zwingli,  and  sometimes  found  violent  expression.  But 
with  the  lapse  of  time  he  learnt  that  the  Emperor  could  not  always  act 
as  he  would. 

After  lengthy  negotiations  the  proposals  for  the  Christian  Union  were 
drafted  in  a  Diet  at  Feldkirch  (February  14,  1529),  and  fully  agreed  to 
at  Waldshut  (April  22, 1529).  The  old  faith  was  to  be  preserved  and, 
as  in  1525,  a  reformation  on  Catholic  lines  was  to  be  carried  out  with 
the  advice  of  the  spiritual  rulers.  The  members  of  the  Union  were 
bound  to  secure  for  each  other  the  right  of  punishing  heretics.  A 
clause  of  doubtful  interpretation  about  conquests  showed  that  the 
possibility  of  such  had  been  considered.  This  Union,  which  made  a 
solid  wall  of  Catholicism  between  South  Germany  and  Switzerland,  was, 
like  the  Civic  League,  a  breaking-up  of  the  old  Confederation.  It  also 
looked  for  an  extension  beyond  Switzerland :  at  the  Diet  of  Speier 
(1529)  Ferdinand  discussed  with  Bavaria  and  the  Bishop  of  Salzburg 
their  entry  into  the  Catholic  League ;  Savoy  was  spoken  of  as  likely  to 
join  it ;  the  Valais  also  had  (May,  1528)  contracted  a  league  for  ten 
years  with  Savoy  ;  even  the  Swabian  League,  it  was  said,  might  become 
a  member.     Bern  and  Zurich  would  then  be  enclosed  by  enemies. 

The  Diet  of  Speier  (February  21, 1529)  issued  a  severe  decree  against 
sects  denying  the  Sacrament  of  the  Flesh  and  Blood  of  Christ ;  —  a 
distinction,  which  the  Protestants  had  not  as  yet  formally  made  for 
themselves,  was  made  by  others.  Nine  of  the  fourteen  cities  that  signed 
the  Protest  presented  on  this  occasion  were  Zwinglian.  Strassburg, 
which  was  in  disgrace  at  the  Diet  for  having  just  abolished  the  Mass, 
drew  closer  to  Zurich,  from  both  political  and  theological  motives. 
The  distinction  between  Lutherans  and  Zwinglians  on  the  subject  of 
the  Eucharist  became  now  of  political  as  well  as  dogmatic  importance. 

Events  were  tending  towards  war  in  Switzerland.  Bern  and  Zurich 
had  agreed  (November  16-18,  1528)  both  to  compel  Unterwalden  to 
pay  the  indemnity  for  invading  Bernese  territory,  and  also  to  protect 
the  Reformed  faith  in  tlie  Common  Lands,  while  the  several  communities 
were  to  be  left  free  to  decide  for  the  Reformed  or  Catholic  side.  At  a 
meeting  of  the  Thurgau  Landsgemeinde  at  Weinfelden  (December  9, 
1528)  envoys  of  both  the  Catholic  and  Reformed  Cantons  attended ;  the 
latter  promised  help  to  those  upon  their  side,  and  asked  their  help  in 
return.  The  majority  of  the  Thurgau  communities  decided  for  Reform. 
Meanwhile,  the  difficulties  of  a  divided  government  in  the  Common 
Territories  had  become  increasingly  acute.  Moreover,  to  the  west, 
Geneva  was  attacked  by  Savoy,  to  which  the  Valais  —  now  (end  of  1528) 
allied  to  the  Five  Cantons  —  was  attached,  and  the  Cln-istian  Union 
supported  Savoy.  As  these  alliances  tended  to  war,  Schaffhausen, 
Appenzell,  and  the  Graublinden  offered  mediation.  But,  as  their  terms 
did  not  include  freedom  of  preaching,  Zurich  —  firm  on  this  point  — 


1528-9]  St  Galleii. —  The  Free  Bailiwicks  331 

would  not  listen  to  them.  Of  the  Five  Cantons,  Unterwalden  was  now 
the  bitterest ;  but  Luzern  and  Zurich —  the  rival  leaders  —  had  made  up 
their  mind  for  war  (May  26-28).  Bern,  anxious  to  preserve  unity, 
would  not  promise  Zurich  help  for  an  offensive  war.  The  demands  of 
Zurich  were  indeed  excessive  ;  the  surrender  of  the  rights  of  the  Cantons 
to  the  administration  of  the  Abbey  of  St  Gallen  (to  which  Zurich, 
Luzern,  Schwyz,  and  Glarus  sent  a  protecting-  bailiff  in  turn  every  two 
years),  the  withdrawal  from  the  Austrian  alliance,  and  the  surrender 
of  the  Luzern  satirist,  Thomas  Murner. 

Riotous  proceedings  at  St  Gallen  were  a  further  cause  of  war.  In 
1528  it  was  Zurich's  turn  to  appoint  the  bailiff,  who  both  attended 
to  secular  business  and  protected  the  Abbey  ;  Zwingli  meant  to  use 
the  opportunity  to  further  his  cause.  The  Abbot  Franz  Geissberger 
Avas  dying  ;  Zwingli  and  the  Privy  Council  bade  (January  28,  1529) 
the  Zurich  official  (Jacob  Frei)  seize  the  monastic  property  upon  his 
death,  secularise  it,  and  introduce  the  Gospel.  But  the  townsmen 
broke  into  the  abbey  (February  23)  before  the  death  of  Geissberger 
(March  23).  The  monks  elected  as  Abbot  Kilian  Ktiuffi,  who  fled  to 
Bregenz,  and  thence  resisted  the  plunder  of  his  abbey  lands.  Since 
the  abbey  was  under  the  protection  of  the  Empire  as  well  as  of  the 
four  Cantons,  and  of  these  Luzern  and  Schwyz  supported  Kiiuffi,  the 
illegal  action  of  Zurich  and  of  the  townsmen  could  not  but  lead  to  war. 

Nor  did  this  incident  stand  alone :  the  delicate  constitutional 
question  of  the  Free  Bailiwicks  added  to  the  intensity  of  feeling. 
Nearly  all  the  villages  in  the  district  had  declared  (May,  1529)  that  they 
would  follow  Zurich,  which  was  openly  encouraging  their  violent  changes ; 
in  all  but  religion  they  would  obey  their  lords,  the  Catholic  majority 
of  the  Cantons.  These  lords,  however,  hesitated  to  use  force  ;  but 
embassies  regained  for  Catholicism  some  parishes.  A  new  bailiff"  sent  b}^ 
Unterwalden  was  to  take  office  in  May  (1529),  and  at  first  Zurich 
resolved  to  prevent  his  entry. 

Bern  did  its  utmost  to  keep  the  peace,  but  Zurich  was  embittered,  while 
the  Five  Cantons  had  enough  cause  to  reject  Bern's  mediation.  Zurich 
declared  war  (June  8),  and  carried  out  a  plan  of  campaign  which  Zwingli 
had  drawn  up  ;  leaving  small  detachments  at  Muri  and  elsewhere,  near 
the  Bernese  troops  at  Bremgarten  (for  Bern,  which  disliked  offensive  war, 
was  yet  willing  to  defend  the  Common  Lands  and  Zurich  if  attacked), 
the  main  body  moved  to  Kappel,  ten  miles  from  Zurich.  Zwingli's  plan 
was  to  move  suddenly  against  the  enemy  ;  to  force  them  to  give  up  the 
Austrian  alliance  and  their  rule  in  the  Commons  Lands,  to  renounce 
pensions,  and  to  allow  free  preaching  in  their  own  territory.  The  Five 
Cantons,  hoping  to  the  last  for  Austrian  help,  were  badly  prepared  :  the 
troops  of  Luzern  had  gone  to  the  Free  Bailiwicks,  but  those  of  the  other 
four  Cantons  moved  from  Zug  towards  Zurich.  Hans  Oebli,  the  Landam- 
mann  of  Glarus,  hurried  up  to  mediate  ;  and,  as  he  was  a  friend  of  Reform, 


332  The  First  Peace  of  Kappel  [1529 


his  voice,  in  spite  of  Zwingli's  plea  for  war,  prevailed.  The  rank  and  file  of 
neither  army  wished  for  war ;  and  so,  by  the  help  of  other  Cantons,  peace 
was  negotiated  by  ambassadors,  first  at  Aarau  and  then  at  Steinhausen 
in  Zug  ;  the  decision  lay  by  custom  with  the  armies  themselves.  Zwingli 
wished  to  force  the  abolition  of  pensions  upon  his  opponents,  but  even 
at  Zurich  some  were  against  this,  and  Bern,  through  Nicholas  Manuel, 
refused  to  enforce  it.  Finally  (June  24, 1529)  peace  was  made  at  Kappel. 
Neither  party  was  to  attack  the  other  for  its  faith.  In  the  Common 
Lands,  the  religious  offenders  should  not  be  punished ;  the  majority  were 
to  decide  for  or  against  the  Mass  and  on  other  questions ;  only  men  of 
jionour  and  moderation  should  be  sent  there  as  bailiffs.  The  Austrian 
alliance  was  renounced,  and  its  very  documents  were  cut  into  shreds  and 
burnt  ;  the  Five  Cantons  were  to  pay  a  war  indemnity  according  to 
the  decision  of  arbitrators,  and,  if  it  remained  unpaid,  Zurich  and  Bern 
might  close  their  markets  to  the  Five  Cantons.  Finally  the  abolition  of 
pensions  and  mercenary  service  was  recommended  to  the  Five  Cantons. 
The  removal  of  the  Austrian  alliance  seemed  to  secure  the  advantage  to 
Zurich,  which  still  kept  Hesse  and  its  chance  of  France.  One  clause  was 
afterwards  differently  construed  to  mean,  that  as  faith  cannot  be  planted 
by  force  no  coercion  should  be  used  against  the  Five  Cantons  or  their 
people  in  matters  touching  their  faith.  The  Zwinglians  thought  that 
free  preaching  extended  to  the  Five  Cantons  as  well  as  to  tlie  Common 
Lancls  ;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  Five  Cantons  naturally  held  them- 
selves free  to  act  as  they  pleased  in  their  own  territory.  Thus  the  peace 
which  placed  Zurich  at  the  height  of  her  power  contained  in  itself  the 
seeds  of  future  war.  As  a  politician,  if  not  as  a  theologian,  Zwingli  was 
justified  in  his  preference  for  force.  As  early  as  August  he  thought 
another  campaign  inevitable. 

In  this  same  year  the  question  of  the  Eucharist  became  of  crucial 
importance  for  the  Protestants.  In  his  writings  of  1522  Zwingli  had 
entered  into  no  criticism  of  the  accepted  view.  The  interpretation,  in 
our  Lord's  saying,  "  This  is  my  body,"  of  the  word  "  is  "  as  "  signifies  " 
was  possibly  suggested  to  him  by  Cornelius  van  Hoen,  after  1521,  in 
a  circular  letter  carried  about  to  theologians  by  Henne  Rode.  The 
expression  of  his  opinion  was  hastened,  if  not  caused,  by  Carlstadt's 
extreme  utterances,  containing  (as  Zwingli  thought)  a  kernel  of  truth 
hidden  by  errors,  and  it  first  took  shape  in  a  letter  to  Matthaus  Alber  of 
Reutlingen  (November  16,  1524) :  the  Eucharist  was  regarded  as  purely 
symbolical,  but  as  a  pledge  of  Christian  profession;  and  he  emphasised, 
as  his  controversy  with  the  Anabaptists  shows,  the  corporate  aspect  in 
the  Eucharist. 

Zwingli's  teaching,  often  presented  as  a  mere  negation  of  Luther's, 
was  no  less  a  negation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  In  spite  of  varying 
views  as  to  the  exact  nature  of  the  Presence,  its  reality  had  always 
been  admitted :    Wiclif 's  denial  of   Transubstantiation   and    Luther's 


The  question  of  the  Eucharist.     Marhurg  Conference     333 

assertion  of  Consubstantiation,  although  affecting  the  relation  of  the 
Presence  to  the  elements,  had  not  called  in  question  that  reality  or 
the  supernatural  grace  of  this  Sacrament  itself.  Zwingli,  fastening 
upon  the  direct  relation  between  God  and  the  individual  apart  from 
outward  acts,  and  starting  from  the  human  side,  made  this  Sacrament 
purely  symbolical,  and  brought  it  down  from  the  supernatural  to  the 
human  i)lane.  In  this  he  was  followed  by  the  later  Sacramentarians, 
and  was  at  one  with  the  Socinians  and  more  radical  sects.  He  thus 
became  the  revolutionary  theologian  of  the  Reformation.  "While  the 
Lutherans  were  sensitive  to  charges  of  a  departure  from  the  Catholic 
faith,  the  Zwinglians  were  conscious  of  their  own  bold  innovations  in 
doctrine  and  organisation  (for  instance,  they  did  not  hold  Ordination 
essential).  Their  divergence  from  the  Catholic  Church  went  far  deeper 
than  objections  to  the  Papacy  or  to  current  abuses  ;  and  thus  the  vision 
of  a  Council  to  promote  union  had  no  attraction  or  possibility  for  them. 
Hence  the  growth  of  their  influence  tended  to  perpetuate  disunion. 

The  south  German  cities  were  led  to  favour  Zwingii's  views,  not 
only  from  democratic  sympathy  with  the  Swiss,  but  from  dislike  of 
Luther's  political  allies,  the  Princes.  Niirnberg  was  an  exception  :  in 
1525  Zwingii's  books  were  forbidden  there  as  "  books  of  the  Devil." 
But  by  April,  1527,  most  of  the  Augsburg  preachers  were  on  his  side  ; 
at  Ulm  Conrad  Sam  was  a  pillar  of  strength  to  him  ;  Ulrich  of  Wiirt- 
temberg,  influenced  by  CEcolampadius  and  then  by  Zwingii's  sermons 
(1524-5),  became  a  strong  Zwinglian,  and  in  Hesse  influenced  the 
Landgrave  in  his  turn ;  at  Mainz,  Hedio,  who  came  from  Basel  (1523) 
corresponded  with  Zwingli ;  Frankfort,  through  Froschauer's  connexion, 
became  a  literary  centre  of  the  "pure  doctrine"  ;  Strassburg,  inspired 
by  Zwingli,  sent  out  its  own  teachers  ;  and  Zwinglianism,  spreading 
down  the  Rhine,  met  a  similar  current  of  doctrine  originating  with 
van  Hoen  in  Holland  ;  it  reached  even  Friesland,  where  Carl  Stadt 
had  worked,  and  Luther,  unable  to  understand  such  a  rapid  growth, 
ascribed  it  to  the  Devil. 

Haner,  a  theologian  who  differed  from  Luther  in  maintaining  a 
purely  spiritual  eating  and  drinking  of  the  Saviour's  flesh  and  blood, 
and  from  Zwingli  in  maintaining  a  supernatural  communication  of  grace, 
had  suggested  to  the  Landgrave  Philip  the  possibility  of  a  conference 
clearing  up  all  differences.  This  advice,  given  at  Speier  in  1529,  where 
unity  among  the  Protestants  was  desirable  for  both  political  and  religious 
reasons,  led  to  the  Marburg  Conference  (September,  1529).  The  character 
and  issue  of  this  Conference  have  been  described  elsewhere.  The  central 
subject  was  the  change  wrought  by  consecration  in  the  elements. 
Zwingli  purposely  restricted  the  discussion  to  leave  hope  for  unity ;  he 
had  a  practical  mind,  accustomed  more  than  Luther's  to  the  give  and 
take  of  equal  discussion.  So  long  as  unity  was  based  upon  ecclesiastical 
organisation,  there  had  been  scope  for  difference  of  opinion  within  one 


334  Political  schemes  of  Zwingli  [i529 

Church  ;  but  now,  when  organic  unity  was  lost,  exact  agreement  of 
theological  opinion  and  the  names  of  certain  leaders  were  made  the 
essentials  of  the  unity  which  it  was  sought  to  secure.  Luther  was  the 
obstacle,  as  insisting  that  union  of  any  kind  should  depend  upon  absolute 
agreement.  But  it  is  hard  to  see  how  Luther  could  have  come  into 
union  with  Zwingli,  without  joining  in  his  political  schemes  ;  since  the 
demand  for  a  union  between  them  was  primarily  political. 

The  failure  to  achieve  theological  unity  ruined  the  great  plan  for  a 
league  Avhich  Zwingli  and  Philip  of  Hesse  had  conceived.  Jacob  Meier  of 
Basel  had  spoken  of  some  considerable  plan  to  be  discussed  at  Marburg  ; 
Zwingli's  correspondence  with  the  Landgrave  and  his  visit  to  Strassburg 
had  suggested  many  things  to  him  ;  his  request  for  an  official  delegate 
from  the  Zurich  Council  did  not  aim  at  theology  alone.  Unfortunately^ 
the  invitation  to  Bern  was  not  sent  until  September  10,  when  it  was  too 
late.  Religious  differences  made  it  clear  that  Saxony  and  Switzerland 
could  not  be  included  in  the  same  league.  However,  Philip  was  ready 
to  do  without  Saxony,  and  he  was  also  ready  to  seek  help  from  France, 
—  an  expedient  which  loyalty  to  the  Empire  made  distasteful  to  Saxony. 
The  proposal  of  such  a  plan  came  from  Philip  ;  the  exact  details  were 
afterwards  filled  in  by  Zwingli,  inspired  from  Strassburg.  Not  only 
France  but  A-^enice  was  to  be  drawn  into  the  league  ;  and  the  instructions 
to  Collin,  the  envoy  there,  were  drawn  up  by  Zwingli  himself,  as  were 
many  other  State  papers. 

The  activity  and  the  expenditure  of  the  French  agents  (Boisregault 
and  Meigret)  in  Switzerland  were  great  ;  the  Most  Christian  King  had 
no  scruple  about  negotiations  with  heretics  (who  indeed  were  better  than 
Turks)  ;  in  March,  1531,  he  was  ready  to  help  Zurich  secretly.  But 
his  great  object  was  to  keep  the  balance  even  in  Switzerland  ;  a  war 
was  not  in  his  interest.  On  the  other  hand,  the  fear  of  arousing  France 
paralysed  the  Emperor's  action.  Hence,  while  foreign  influences  pushed 
Switzerland  to  the  verge  of  war,  they  also  served  to  keep  it  back  from 
war  itself. 

Diplomacy  took  up  much  of  Zwingli's  time,  but  his  pen  was  as  active 
as  ever  :  he  wrote  commentaries  upon  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  a  number  of 
important  letters,  and  controversial  tracts.  His  power  at  Zurich  and 
the  spirit  of  the  city  were  at  their  height.  In  a  complaint  to  Luzern 
about  Thomas  Murner  (whose  Heretics'  Calendar  seemed  dangerous  and 
offensive  to  an  age  over-sensitive  to  ridicule)  the  Council  said  (Feb- 
ruary 14, 1529)  that  they  were  free,  and  subject  to  no  Emperor  or  lord  ; 
they,  like  France,  Venice,  and  other  States,  ordered  spiritual  persons 
and  property  as  they  thought  well.  Zwingli's  enemies  too  were  now 
under  his  feet ;  after  December  7,  1528,  only  the  barest  civic  rights 
without  the  chance  of  office  were  left  to  non-Reformers  ;  attendance  at 
Mass  even  outside  the  city  was  punished  by  fine  ;  to  eat  fish  instead  of 
flesh  on  Friday  was  an  offence.     But  a  reaction  might  at  any  time  set  in. 


1529-30]  The  Tetrapolitana  335 

It  was  indeed  the  fear  of  such  a  reaction  that  led  Zwingli  to  make  his 
Reformation  as  tliorough  as  possible. 

In  this  period  it  becomes  impossible  to  separate  Swiss  politics  from 
German.  The  restoration  of  Duke  Ulrich  of  Wiirttemberg  (which 
Zurich  was  more  disposed  than  Bern  to  help)  was  an  unfailing  subject  of 
negotiation.  With  this  Saul  who,  could  he  but  be  restored,  seemed 
likely  to  be  a  Paul  to  the  Reformation,  Zwingli  had  a  connexion  of  long- 
standing ;  and  through  him  he  became  friendly  with  that  able  politician, 
the  Landgrave  Philip  of  Hesse.  Zv/ingli's  Hessian  correspondence  in 
cipher  begins  with  the  second  Diet  of  Speier,  when  the  Landgrave 
(April  22,  1529)  first  wrote  about  the  Marburg  Conference,  and  it  ends 
eleven  days  before  Zwingli's  death.  The  two  correspondents  formed 
vast  schemes,  for  the  Landgrave,  like  Zwingli  himself,  was  no  rigid  con- 
servative. As  early  as  1524  Zwingli  had  formed  a  plan  for  an  extensive 
league  ;  but  the  Anabaptist  troubles  led  him  to  lay  it  aside.  Now  under 
the  Landgrave's  influence  he  returned  to  it.  After  the  Conference  the 
proposal  of  "  a  Christian  agreement "  came  from  Hesse ;  it  aimed  at 
securing  mutual  protection  and  converts  to  the  Word  of  God  ;  the 
Schmalkaldic  League  (April,  1531)  owed  something  to  this  conception. 
But  the  idea  of  a  league  uniting  Swiss  and  German  Protestants  failed 
through  resistance  from  the  Elector  of  Saxony,  faithful  to  the  Empire 
and  firm  in  his  Lutheran  creed. 

The  reward  Zwingli  gained  for  deserting  his  old  principle  of  keeping 
aloof  from  foreign  complications  was  small ;  his  widest  plans  miscarried. 
No  greater  success  rewarded  Bucer  in  his  attempts  at  mediation  between 
the  Lvitheran  and  Zwinglian  camps.  The  creed  of  Strassburg,  Constance, 
Memmingen,  and  Lindau,  drawn  up  by  Bucer  and  Capito,  presented  to 
the  Emperor  July  11,  1530,  and  known  as  the  Tetrapolitana,  was  con- 
sidered and  rejected  by  Basel  and  Zurich  at  the  Evangelic  Diet  of  Basel, 
November  16,  1530.  It  affirmed  that  the  true  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  were  given,  truly  to  eat  and  drink,  for  the  nourishment  of  souls  ; 
positively,  it  made  as  close  an  approach  to  the  Lutheran  view  as  was 
possible,  while  by  omission  of  any  statement  as  to  the  elements  it  avoided 
contradicting  that  view ;  in  other  articles  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures, 
not  mentioned  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  and  the  rejection  of  images 
are  set  forth,  Zwingli's  own  Confession  was  embodied  in  the  Fidei  ratio 
ad  Carolum  Imperatorem  presented  to  the  Emperor  (July  3,  1530). 
The  earlier  sections  expounded  the  Nicene  faith;  the  sixth  section 
emphasised  Wiclif's  theory  of  the  invisible  Church  composed  of  elect 
believers  ;  the  seventh  and  eighth  asserted  tlie  Sacraments  to  be  merely 
signs  and  affirmed  Zwingli's  teaching  in  terms  likely  to  anger  Catholics 
and  Lutherans  alike ;  later  sections  depreciated  ceremonies,  denounced 
images  as  unscriptural,  magnified  the  office  of  preacher,  and  discussed 
the  relations  of  Church  and  State  at  length.  The  Anabaptists  were 
often  incidentally  condemned,  and  the  assertion  of  his  own  views  was 


336  Union  impossible.      War  of  Musso  [i530-i 

clear  and  unflinching.  No  wish  to  conciliate  others,  no  fear  of  a  breach 
with  the  past  is  apparent. 

Even  when  Strassburg  (December,  1530)  joined  the  Schmalkaldic 
League,  Zwingli's  desire  for  political  union  did  not  overcome  his  conscien- 
tious adherence  to  his  own  views.  He  was  thus  the  obstacle  in  the 
negotiations  at  this  stage  (March- July,  1531),  when  the  Elector  of 
Saxony  had  yielded  so  far  as  to  admit  the  adherents  of  the  Tetrapolitana 
to  the  Schmalkaldic  League.  While  he  was  willing  to  leave  something 
vague,  he  could  not  accept  definitions  which  he  held  to  be  untrue. 
Moreover,  the  Lutherans  desired  a  General  Council  ;  while  Zwingli 
had  completely  broken  with  tradition,  and  his  organisation  left  no  room 
for  Councils. 

Apart  from  doctrine,  Zwiuglianism  on  its  political  side  was  now 
(1530-1)  a  greater  danger  to  the  Empire  than  was  Lutheranism. 
Ferdinand  wrote  to  the  Emperor  after  the  battle  of  Kappel,  that 
Switzerland  was  the  head  of  German  Protestantism,  and  to  conquer 
it  was  the  true  way  of  mastering  Germany  and  re-establishing  religious 
peace  ;  the  papal  Legate  at  Brussels  wrote  to  Clement  VII  (May,  1531)  ; 
^'-Zurich  est  desormais  la  tSte  et  la  capitale  de  la  secte  Z/utherienne." 
But  her  power  was  declining.  It  was  only  a  small  gain  that  Ulm 
(July,  1531),  moved  by  the  definite  refusal  of  Electoral  Saxony  to  alter 
its  position,  became  more  Zwinglian,  or  that  Bern,  whose  support  was 
essential  to  Zvirich,  rejected  the  Tetrapolitana.  In  Zurich  itself  Zwingli's 
influence  was  lessening ;  the  unrestrained  power  of  the  Privy  Council  had 
grown  distasteful,  and  the  disaffected  nobility  was  regaining  power ;  on 
the  question  of  an  embassy  to  France  (February,  1531),  the  opposition 
showed  itself  stronger  than  his  followers.  The  trade  of  the  city  had 
been  injured  by  political  unrest ;  strict  sumptuary  laws  and  moral  con- 
trol led  to  discontent  among  the  artisans  and  tradesmen,  who  regretted 
the  monasteries  ;  the  sermons  lost  some  of  their  old  attraction.  So 
keenly  did  Zwingli  feel  this  change,  that  he  formally  asked  leave  to 
resign  his  preachership  and  go  to  work  elsewhere  (July  26).  But  he  was 
too  closely  bound  up  with  the  town,  and  at  the  prayer  of  a  deputation, 
made  up  of  the  two  Burgomasters  and  the  three  chief  Gild-masters,  he 
kept  his  office ;  and  for  the  last  months  of  his  life  he  retained,  though 
precariously,  something  of  his  former  influence. 

Inside  the  Confederation  war  was  again  drawing  nearer ;  the  Catholic 
Cantons  had  still  their  own  grievances  and  were  embittered  by  defeat : 
they  still  — although  against  hope — looked  to  Austriafor  help.  Zwingli, 
angry  at  the  insults  to  Avhich  he  was  subjected,  was  decidedly  for  war 
("  The  knot  can  only  be  loosed  by  firmness  ").  In  this  state  of  affairs 
the  war  of  Musso  kindled  the  flame.  The  castellan  of  Musso  (di 
Medigino),  since  1525  a  troublesome  neighbour  of  the  Graubiinden,  had 
(March,  1531)  murdered  a  Graubiinden  envoy  returning  from  Milan, 
and  invaded  the  Valtelline.     The  League  appealed  to  the  Swiss  and 


I53i]  Battle  of  Kcupijel.     Death  of  Zwingli  337 

especially  to  Zurich.  Zwingli  believed  that  the  Emperor  stood  behind 
the  castellan,  and  that  movements  of  troops  in  Austria  foreshadowed  an 
attack  upon  Zurich  —  an  event  which  German  politics  made  not  un- 
likely. The  Emperor  did  not  indeed  himself  support  the  castellan,  but 
he  was  inclined  to  approve  the  war,  since  it  kept  the  dangerous  Swiss 
employed,  and  he  was  not  unwilling  that  ]\Iusso  should  be  helped  without 
expense  to  himself  lest,  if  left  without  help,  the  castellan  should  turn  to 
France.  The  Swiss  Diet  was  divided  by  the  Graubiinden  request.  The 
Five  Cantons  refused  help  :  the  Protestants  promised  it.  Zwingli  again, 
in  the  Privy  Council  and  in  closest  touch  with  the  French  ambassador 
Meigret,  seized  the  opportunity  to  revive  his  far-reaching  plan  of  alliance. 

Political  means  were  used  for  religious  objects.  An  assembly  of 
the  Zwinglian  allies  (May  15)  at  Zurich  determined  that  the  Five 
Cantons  must  be  forced  to  allow  free  way  to  preaching.  An  embargo 
upon  trade  by  land  —  to  check  the  passage  of  wine,  wheat,  salt,  and 
iron  — ■  was  to  be  set  up  against  the  Five  Cantons.  It  was  an  unhappy 
method  of  compulsion,  although  it  had  a  precedent  in  1438,  and  had 
been  contemplated  in  the  First  Peace  of  Kappel.  The  chief  responsibility 
belongs  to  Bern,  who  suggested  it  as  an  alternative  to  the  war  proposed 
by  Zurich.  Things  drifted  nearer  to  war  in  spite  of  representations 
from  France  and  from  the  other  Cantons  :  scarcity  of  food  distressed 
and  angered  the  Catholics  ;  Zurich  would  only  remove  the  embargo  if 
free  preaching  were  allowed. 

The  Forest  Cantons  this  time  made  the  first  move,  and  from  Zug 
marched  towards  Zurich  (October  4-9).  When  news  of  this  reached 
Zurich,  a  small  band,  which  in  the  end  reached  1200,  under  George 
Goldli  set  out  (October  9)  ;  a  larger  band  of  1500  men  fairly  well 
equipped  started  two  days  later,  and  Zwingli  accompanied  them.  But 
there  was  a  lack  of  enthusiasm  and  even  of  preparation.  In  Bern  the 
people  blamed  Zwingli  for  this  "parsons'  war."  The  action  of  Bern 
indeed  was  ambiguous  ;  partly  owing  to  trouble  nearer  home,  and 
partly  from  aversion  to  the  war.  Her  contingent  was  not  ready  until 
the  crisis  had  passed.  But  there  is  no  need  to  look  for  open  treachery 
when  a  house  is  divided  against  itself. 

The  advance  guard  under  Goldli  —  which  was  only  to  keep  on  the 
defensive  —  began  the  battle  at  Kappel  on  October  11  ;  they  neglected  to 
charge  the  enemy  when  changing  their  attack,  and  their  position  was 
turned.  When  the  main  body  under  Rudolf  Lavater  reached  the  Albis 
—  the  position  fixed  by  the  Council  —  the  day  was  practically  lost.  Its 
attack  upon  the  8000  Forest  men  failed.  Zwingli  was  among  the  slain, 
and  his  body  was  treated  disgracefully  as  that  of  a  traitor.  His  stepson. 
Ceroid  Meyer,  Diebold  von  Geroldscok,  Abbot  Joner  of  Kappel,  and 
others  of  his  friends,  perislied  with  him. 

The  remaining  Zurich  troops  and  allies  came  up  (October  24)  with 
the  Catholic  troops  on  the  Gubel  near  Zug  and  were  defeated  in  an 

C.    M.   H.   II.  22 


338  Second  Peace  of  Kappel  [l53i 

engagement  more  serious  than  the  first.  Zurich  lay  open  to  its  enemies  : 
the  Emperor  might  now  have  intervened  with  effect.  But  through  the 
mediation  of  the  French  ambassadors  and  the  other  Cantons  peace  was 
made  (November  23)  :  the  conditions  of  the  First  Peace  of  Kappel 
were  now  reversed.  It  was  to  the  credit  of  the  victors  that  they  did  not 
press  their  success  too  far.  Even  now  Zurich  was  not  disposed  for 
peace  ;  but  the  country  villages,  which  had  lost  by  the  embargo,  here 
as  at  Bern  were  strongly  for  it.  By  the  Second  Peace  of  Kappel  the 
territory  of  Zurich  was  kept  intact :  in  the  Common  Lands  existing  beliefs 
were  left  alone,  but  Catholic  minorities,  where  there  were  such,  received 
protection  ;  government  by  the  majorit}^  of  the  Cantons  was  affirmed. 
The  management  of  its  own  religious  matters  was  left  to  each  Canton. 
Zwingli's  scheme  to  force  the  Catholic  Cantons  to  give  free  play  to  the 
Reformation  in  the  Common  Lands  and  in  their  own  territory  had  failed; 
but  the  principle  of  Federal  control  over  religion  was  not  asserted. 
The  Christian  Civic  Alliance  and  the  Treaty  of  1529  were  annulled. 
Basel,  Schaffhausen,  St  Gallen,  and  Miihlhausen  paid  indemnities  of 
from  1000  to  4000  crowns.  Zurich  and  the  town  of  St  Gallen  were 
to  compensate  and  restore  the  Abbey  of  St  Gallen  :  the  Reformed 
communities  in  the  Free  Bailiwicks,  Thurgau,  and  Toggenburg  (where 
the  Abbot  regained  his  power),  were  allowed  to  keep  their  faith  ; 
Catholic,  but  not  Reformed,  minorities  were  protected.  Monks  and 
nuns  might  return  to  their  Houses.  Solothurn  restored  its  old  worship 
to  escape  the  payment  of  an  indemnity.  Bern,  which  had  to  forego  the 
compensation  from  Unterwalden,  and  Zurich  were  left  discontented  and 
almost  bankrupt.  Zurich  was  forced  (December,  1531)  to  grant  tlie 
Kappel  Charter,  by  which  its  rural  districts  gained  a  right  to  be  consulted 
upon  all  important  questions,  and  to  give  or  refuse  their  consent  for  any 
future  war.  Such  was  the  outcome  of  Zwingli's  ambitious  scheme, 
whereby  Bern  and  Zurich  were  to  be  the  pillars  of  a  great  Protestant 
power  in  Switzerland,  extending  its  influence  far  afield.  The  peace  per- 
petuated division  among  the  Reformers,  and  separated  Switzerland  from 
Germany.  Glarus  became  Catholic  once  more  ;  Bern  grew  more  Lutheran; 
in  the  Common  Lands  the  Aargau  suffered  most  reaction,  the  Thurgau 
least.  Zurich  is  henceforth  externally  of  less  importance.  The  future 
of  Swiss  Protestantism  lay  with  Bern  and  Geneva,  the  latter  not  yet  a 
Confederate,  but  in  league  with  Bern  and  Freiburg  (February,  1528). 

And,  furthermore,  the  Counter-Reformation,  or  the  Catholic  Reaction, 
(neither  name  aptly  describes  the  movement  or  its  origin)  found  a 
ready  home  in  Switzerland.  Catholicism  began  to  gain  ground  here 
soon  after  the  Second  Treaty  of  Kappel,  without  having  to  wait  for  any 
of  the  stimulating  movements  felt  elsewhere  ;  the  scheme  of  Catholic 
reform  proposed  in  1524-5,  and  the  disasters  of  Zwinglianism  were 
effective  local  causes. 

Outside  Powers  were  unwilling  to  let  the  war  die   out ;  Philip    of 


1531-8]  Results  of  ZivingWs  policy  339 

Hesse,  always  ready  and  hopeful,  tried  to  rouse  it  to  new  life  ;  Basel  was 
arming-,  but  the  south  German  towns  urged  peace.  The  Pope  called  upon 
the  Emperor  to  make  an  end  and  put  down  the  heresy  at  once,  and  even 
sent  to  the  Five  Cantons  "  aliquantum  pecuniae  "  ;  Ferdinand  would  have 
done  the  same,  but  was  overruled  by  his  advisers.  The  Austrian  statesmen 
hoped  to  use  the  war  for  the  Emperor's  good,  but  to  do  so  without 
expense :  and  the  Emperor  feared  by  any  decisive  step  to  rouse  the 
French  to  war.  The  French  on  their  part  gained  greatly  by  the  Peace. 
Thus  the  settlement  remained  undisturbed,  and  the  south  German  towns 
drew  nearer  to  the  Princes  now  that  Zurich  could  give  them  no  help. 

In  Zurich  itself  the  religious  movement  continued :  Bullinger, 
Zwingli's  son-in-law  and  successor,  banished  from  Bremgarten  by  the 
Peace,  carried  on  his  work ;  but  it  was  now  solely  theological  and 
internal ;  the  Privy  Council  was  discredited,  as  Bullinger  explained  to 
Myconius.  Its  existence  meant  foreign  entanglements.  And  Zurich, 
weakened  by  the  new  power  given  to  the  country  districts,  became  less 
and  less  able  to  pursue  an  adventurous  foreign  policy  among  the  great 
States  of  Europe. 

But  the  strife  of  doctrine  remained  behind,  always  significant  for  the 
history  of  thought,  at  times  for  politics  as  well.  Bucer's  task  of  mediation 
grew  harder  and  its  end  more  remote.  Conferences  with  Melanchthon 
had  no  result,  because  it  was  impossible  to  devise  a  formula  such  as 
would  satisfy  Luther  and  still  recognise  the  conflicting  doctrines  adapted 
to  minds  of  different  types.  At  Wittenberg  (May  22-27,  1536)  a  well- 
attended  Conference  produced  a  conciliatory  document,  the  Wittenberg 
Concord.  According  to  it,  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  were  truly 
and  substantially  present  in  the  Eucharist,  shown  and  received.  Bucer, 
by  a  distinction  not  widely  accepted,  contended  that  the  impious  did  not, 
Avhile  the  merely  unworthy  did,  receive  them.  To  this  view  Strassburg, 
Augsburg,  Ulm,  Constance,  and  other  cities  agreed.  But  Luther  hesitated 
to  sign  the  Concord  because  he  heard  the  Swiss  had  agreed  to  it,  and 
feared  it  must  therefore  be  bad. 

On  the  other  hand,  in  the  previous  January,  the  Swiss  theologians 
had  met  at  Basel  and  there  drawn  up  the  First  Helvetic  Confession.  It 
was  conciliatory  in  tone,  and  went  beyond  the  purely  symbolic  view,  the 
7iuda  signa,  of  Zwingli.  But  its  framers  were  not  at  Wittenberg ;  and 
Bucer,  the  medium  of  intercourse,  did  not  adequately  represent  one 
side  to  the  other.  Another  Conference  of  the  Swiss  Reformers  at  13asel 
drafted  a  new  document,  showing  a  wish  for  unity,  and  at  the  same  time 
making  it  clear  why  the  Wittenberg  Concord  could  not  possibly  be 
accepted.  Luther's  reply  (1537)  was  guarded  and  distrustful,  so  that  its 
circulation  in  Switzerland  did  not  help  the  cause  which  Bucer  and  Melanch- 
thon had  at  heart.  A  Conference  at  Zurich  (April  28,  1538)  showed  the 
politicians  as  eager  for  unity  as  the  theologians  for  distinction.  Finally, 
Zurich  (September  28,  1538)  resolved  to  keep  to  her  old  view  with  no 


340  The  Consensus  Tigurinus  [1549-8I 

modifications.  If  doctrine  was  to  be  the  basis  of  unity,  the  adjustment 
of  the  limits  of  difference  required  nice  discussion.  Luther's  violence 
of  language,  and  Zwingli's  mingling  of  politics  and  theology,  had  com- 
plicated that  discussion ;  henceforth,  old  positions  eagerly  guarded  and 
attacked,  associations  and  repugnances  valued  above  their  real  import- 
ance, were  further  obstacles  to  union.  But  it  was  hard  to  give  any  strong 
religious  reasons  why  unity  as  distinct  from  charity  should  be  sought. 
Political  reasons  there  were  in  plenty,  but  their  admission  made  the 
discussions  theologically  lifeless. 

Calvin  may  have  learnt  much  of  organisation  from  Zurich ;  but  in 
theological  importance  he  overshadows  not  only  Z  wingli  but  all  other  Swiss 
reformers.  As  to  the  Eucharist,  while  Zwingiian  in  his  exegesis  he  w^as 
more  spiritual  in  his  conceptions,  emphasising  the  grace  conferred,  while 
not  connecting  it  with  the  elements  ;  a  change  which  has  also  been  detected 
in  Bullinger  and  later  Z  winglians.  But  they  agreed  in  rejecting  Luther's 
doctrine.  Like  Bucer  Calvin  worked  for  unity,  and  unlike  Zwingli  did 
not  spread  his  political  energies  over  too  large  a  field.  He  was  thus  able 
to  concentrate  and  deepen  influences  set  in  motion  by  Zwingli.  But 
even  Calvin's  labours  for  unity  had  a  political  end  :  if  to  observers  from 
the  outside  German  and  French  Protestants  could  appear  united,  the 
French  King,  ally  of  the  one,  could  not  well  persecute  the  other.  Calvin 
and  Bullinger  drew  up  (1549)  the  CoyiseyisusTigurmus  —  strongly  anti- 
Lutheran  in  tone  (^perversa  et  impia  supcrstitio  est  ipsum  Christum  sub 
elementis  includere).  Up  to  this  time  there  had  been  a  division  among 
the  Swiss  leaders  :  Bullinger  had  given  up  all  hope  of  unity  with  the 
Lutherans :  at  Bern,  with  its  Lutheran  inclinations,  that  hope  was  still 
alive.  But  with  the  Consensus  Protestant  Switzerland  was  united. 
Basel,  with  traditions  of  synods  of  its  own,  Bern,  with  a  distrust  of  all 
synods  as  leading  to  strife,  did  not  welcome  it  greatly,  but  yet  adopted 
it  (1551)  ;  so  did  Schaffhausen,  St  Gallen,  Biel,  and  Miihlhausen.  Thus 
in  the  end  dogmatic  and  political  unity  —  which  had  so  often  helped  or 
thwarted  each  other  —  claimed  a  common  territory  in  Reformed  Switzer- 
land. And  the  reaction  following  upon  Zwingli's  strict  control  brought  a 
growth  of  toleration.  In  Germany,  meanwhile,  the  teaching  of  Zwingli 
became  nominally  less  important  than  that  of  Calvin,  and  the  division 
between  Reformed  and  Lutheran  —  so  fatal  to  German  Protestantism  — 
belongs  in  its  later  stages  more  to  the  history  of  Calvinism  than  of 
Zwinglianism.  But  Zwingli  in  his  treatment  of  the  Eucharist  had  raised 
a  fundamental  issue  ;  and  his  views  on  this  head,  like  his  treatment  of 
public  worship,  have  had  a  wider  influence  than  their  recognition 
in  Confessions  and  Liturgies  would  indicate.  Thus  Zwinglianism 
became  the  name  of  a  school  of  thought  rather  than  of  a  religious 
body. 

Zwingli's  plans  would  have  given  the  Confederation  unity  and  cohe- 
sion at  the  expense  of  his  opponents.      But  the  Reformation  postponed 


1581-1648]      Division  of  the  Siviss  Confederation  341 

the  solution  of  the  unsolved  problem  of  Swiss  unity  ;  and  the  Counter- 
Reformation  made  the  difficulties  greater.  Cardinal  Carlo  Borromeo, 
Archbishop  of  Milan,  took  a  deep  interest  in  Switzerland  :  he  founded  a 
Swiss  College  at  iNIilan,  introduced  into  the  land  the  Jesuits  (1574-81) 
and  the  Capuchins  (1581-8),  and  procured  a  permanent  nunciature  at 
Luzern.  After  his  death,  Luzern,  under  Ludwig  Pfyffer,  formed  a 
league  with  Uri,  Scliwyz,  Unterwalden,  Zug,  Solothurn,  and  Freiburg  to 
maintain  offensively  and  defensively  the  Catholic  Faith  (1586)  :  this  was 
known  as  the  Borromean  League.  Thus  the  division  into  two  camps 
was  crystallised,  and  the  old  Federal  Constitution  was  almost  dissolved  : 
Diets  —  save  those  of  the  opposed  Cantons  held  separately — became  rare. 
The  disputes  about  the  Common  Lauds  went  on  and  with  foreign  influences 
intensified  the  differences  due  to  faith.  In  the  Thirty  Years'  War  the 
Protestants  expressly  and  the  Catholics  tacitly  adopted  neutrality,  but 
could  not  hold  entirely  aloof.  The  country's  importance  to  its  neigh- 
bours lay  in  its  provision  of  soldiers  for  hire,  and  for  this  reason  they 
endured  its  independence.  The  neutrality  adopted  was  not  that  advo- 
cated yet  departed  from  by  Zwingli :  it  resulted  from  the  religious 
divisions  due  to  him,  combined  with  the  foreign  service  he  condemned. 
The  Reformation  in  Switzerland  shows  how  largely  the  forms  in 
which  religious  ideas  express  themselves  are  moulded  by  political  forces. 
It  was  also  more  than  elsewhere  the  centre  of  the  national  history.  It 
was  Zwingli  who,  by  his  religious  influence,  and  his  political  mistakes, 
was  the  cause  of  this.  Politically  his  dearest  schemes  miscarried  ; 
ecclesiastically  his  type  of  organisation  and  worship  endured  ;  doctrinally 
he  was  overshadowed  by  others.  But  the  permanent  division  of  the 
Cantons  was  due  to  him  :  not  merely  to  the  doctrines  he  taught,  but  on 
the  one  hand  to  the  power  with  which  he  impressed  them  upon  Zurich, 
and  on  the  other,  to  the  energy  and  violence  with  which,  regardless  of 
Federal  liberties,  he  strove  to  force  them  upon  the  other  Cantons. 


CHAPTER   XI 

CALVIN   AND  THE   EEFORMED   CHURCH 

The  Reformation  emerges  as  an  inevitable  result  from  the  interaction 
and  opposition  of  many  and  complex  forces.  The  spirit  of  the  time,  even 
when  intending  to  be  its  enemy,  proved  its  friend.  The  Renaissance, 
which  had  raised  the  ancient  classical  v^^orld  from  its  grave,  was  not  in 
itself  opposed  to  the  Catholic  Church ;  but  in  the  reason  it  educated 
and  the  historical  temper  it  formed,  in  the  literature  it  recovered  and 
the  languages  it  loved,  in  the  imagination  it  cultivated  and  the  new 
sense  of  the  beautiful  it  created,  there  were  forces  of  subtle  hostility  to 
the  system  which  had  been  built  upon  the  ruins  of  classical  antiquity. 
Erasmus  used  his  wit  to  mock  the  vulgar  scholasticism  of  Luther.  But 
Erasmus  more  than  any  man  made  Protestantism  necessary  and  the 
Papacy  impossible,  especially  to  the  grave  and  reverent  peoples  of  the 
North.  The  navigators,  who  by  finding  new  continents  enlarged  our 
notions  both  of  the  earth  and  man,  seemed  but  to  add  fresh  provinces 
to  Rome  ;  but,  by  moving  the  centre  of  social  and  intellectual  gravity 
from  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  to  those  of  the  Atlantic,  they 
inflicted  on  her  a  fatal  wound.  Moreover,  by  the  easy  acquisition  of 
the  wealth  which  lower  races  had  accumulated,  there  was  begotten  in 
the  Latin  peoples  so  fierce  and  intolerant  an  avarice  that  tlieir  highest 
ambitions  appeared  ignoble,  in  contrast  with  the  magnanimity  and  the 
enterprise  of  the  Teutonic  nations  that  became  Protestant. 

And  just  as  the  history  of  man's  past  lengthened  and  the  earth  around 
him  broadened  and  with  it  his  horizon,  so  the  nature  beneath  him  and 
the  heavens  above  began  by  telling  him  their  secrets  to  throw  over  him 
their  spell.  With  the  new  knowledge  of  nature  came  new  hopes  which 
looked  more  to  the  energies  that  were  creating  the  future  than  to  the 
authorities  that  had  fashioned  the  past.  Faith  in  man  as  man,  and  not 
simply  as  King  or  noble,  as  Pope  or  priest,  was  reborn  ;  and  he  appeared 
as  the  maker  of  history  and  the  doer  of  the  deeds  that  distinguish  time. 
The  most  famous  of  the  humanists  were  either  themselves  poor  or  sons 
of  poor  men,  though  they  might  affect,  especially  iij  Italy,  the  Courts 
of  Kings  and  the  palaces  of  the  great,  who  had  patronage  as  well  as 

3i2 


Luther  as  a  Reformer  343 

power  in  their  hands.  The  most  eminent  of  the  explorers  was  a  Genoese 
sailor ;  the  best  known  conqueror  was  an  officer's  bastard ;  the  author 
of  the  new  astronomy  was  a  clerk  who  never  became  a  priest ;  the  fore- 
most scholar  of  the  day  was  a  child  born  out  of  wedlock ;  the  most 
acute  political  thinker  was  a  plain  Florentine  citizen ;  and  the  most 
potent  English  statesman  was  the  son  of  a  rustic  tradesman.  And  this 
strenuous  individualism  found  its  counterpart  in  religion ;  the  rights  of 
man  in  religion  were  declared ;  the  individual  asserted  his  competence 
to  know  and  to  obey  the  truth  by  which  he  was  to  be  judged. 

But  the  Reformation,  at  least  in  its  earlier  phase,  bore  also  upon  its 
face  the  image  of  the  man  whose  genius  gave  it  actual  being.  Luther 
had  become  a  Reformer  rather  by  necessity  of  nature  than  by  choice  of 
will.  His  peasant  descent  may  have  given  him  a  conservative  obstinacy 
which  was  concentrated  and  intensified  by  his  narrow  scholastic  educa- 
tion. No  man  ever  clung  with  more  tender  intensity  to  the  customs 
and  beliefs  that  could  be  saved  from  the  wreckage  of  the  past.  But  he 
did  his  work  as  a  Reformer  the  more  thoroughly  because  he  did  it  from 
nature  rather  than  from  choice.  It  is  doubtful  if  in  the  whole  of  history 
any  man  ever  showed  more  of  the  insight  that  changes  audacity  into 
courage.  By  the  publication  of  his  Theses  he  proclaimed  a  doctrine  of 
grace  that  broke  up  the  system  which  Europe  had  for  centuries  believed 
and  obeyed.  By  burning  the  papal  Bull  he  defied  an  authority  which  no 
person  or  people  had  been  able  to  resist  and  yet  live.  By  his  address 
to  the  nobles  of  the  German  nation  he  appealed  from  ecclesiastical 
passion  and  prejudice  to  secular  honour  and  honesty.  By  his  appear- 
ance and  conduct  at  the  Diet  of  Worms  he  showed  that  he  could  act  as 
he  had  spoken.  By  his  translation  of  the  Bible  he  spread  before  the  eyes 
of  every  religious  man  the  law  by  which  he  was  bound.  And  by  his 
marriage  he  declared  the  sanctity  of  the  home  and  the  ties  which 
attached  man  to  woman. 

But,  though  Luther  was  by  nature  strong  and  heroic,  he  was  yet 
so  intellectually  timid  that  he  could  not  bear  suspense  of  judgment, 
even  where  such  suspense  was  an  obvious  duty.  And  so  the  system  he 
created  was,  alike  in  what  it  sacrificed  and  what  it  spared,  a  splendid 
example  of  dialectical  adaptation  to  personal  experience.  He  was 
indeed  so  typical  a  German  that  his  Church  suited  the  German  people ; 
but  for  the  same  reason  it  could  not  live  outside  Teutonic  institutions 
and  the  Teutonic  mind.  Lie  had  no  constitutional  tendency  to  scepti- 
cism, for  his  convictions  did  not  so  much  follow  or  obey  as  underlie  and 
guide  the  processes  of  his  logic.  Hence  he  was  a  man  equally  powerful 
in  promoting  and  in  resisting  change ;  he  stood  up  against  forces  that 
would  have  overwhelmed  a  weaker  or  a  smaller  man  ;  but  as  a  conserva- 
tive by  nature  he  professed  beliefs  that  a  man  of  a  more  consistent 
intellect  would  have  dismissed,  and  cherished  customs  which  a  more 
radical  reformer  would  have  surrendered.     And  he  was  not  conscious 


344  Inadequacy  of  Luther^ s  system 

of  any  incompatibility  among  the  things  he  retained  or  of  any  coherence 
between  what  he  gave  up  and  what  he  spared.  Thus  he  opposed  to 
the  authority  of  the  Pope  the  authority  of  Holy  Scripture;  but  the 
Apostle  who  seemed  to  ignore  or  deny  his  most  fundamental  belief 
he  was  ready  to  denounce  as  if  he  were  the  Pope.  Pie  appealed  to 
the  German  people  to  uphold  against  Rome  a  Gospel  which  declared 
all  men  to  be  equal  before  God;  but,  when  the  peasants  drew  from  his 
first  principle  an  inference  which  justified  their  revolt,  he  sided  with  the 
Princes.  From  his  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith  he  argued  against 
the  papal  chair  and  its  claims ;  but  his  theory  of  the  Eucharistic  Sacra- 
ment was  more  full  of  mysteries  that  tax  the  reason  than  any  of  the 
articles  which  he  regarded  as  specifically  Popish.  He  held  freedom  to  be 
the  right  of  every  Christian  man,  and  confessed  himself  bound  to  accept 
every  consequence  which  came  by  legitimate  reasoning  from  the  truth 
he  acknowledged;  but  he  refused  the  right  hand  of  brotherhood  to 
Reformers  whose  love  of  freedom,  integrity  of  character,  purity  of 
motive,  and  zeal  in  the  faith  were  equal  to  his  own. 

The  longer  the  Protestant  Church  lived,  the  more  the  Reformer's 
inconsistencies  and  the  inadequacy  of  his  Reformation  became  evident ; 
and  so  a  double  result  followed.  On  the  one  side  the  ancient  Church 
pressed  with  growing  severity  upon  the  revolt  and  its  leaders ;  and,  on 
the  other  side,  the  more  eager  of  the  rebellious  spirits  went  forward  in 
search  of  simpler  yet  more  secure  positions.  Rome  did  not  indeed 
understand  at  once  what  had  happened ;  but  she  understood  enough  to 
see  how  Luther  and  the  communities  he  had  founded  could  best  be  dealt 
with.  An  ancient  Church  which  has  governed  man  for  centuries, 
instructed  him,  organised  and  administered  his  worship,  consecrated  him 
from  his  birth  and  comforted  him  in  his  death,  has  always  an  enormous 
reserve  of  energy.  Man  is  a  being  with  an  infinite  capacity  for  rever- 
ence ;  and  it  is  where  he  most  reveres  that  he  is  most  conservative 
and  least  inclined  to  change.  And  consequences  soon  followed  from  the 
Reformation  which  threatened  to  limit  its  scope  to  the  purification  of 
Catholicism,  to  the  restoration  of  its  decayed  energies,  and  to  furnishing 
it  with  the  opportunity  of  vindicating  by  policy  and  argument,  by  speech 
and  action,  its  name  and  its  claims.  Heresies  soon  arose  in  the  Protes- 
tant as  they  had  arisen  in  the  early  Church ;  the  collision  of  the  new 
thought  with  the  old  associations  provoked  discussion  ;  discussion  begat 
differences ;  differences  became  acute  antitheses  which  were  hardened 
into  permanence  by  the  very  means  taken  to  soften  or  overcome  them. 
Anabaptism  supplied  Catholicism  with  fruitful  illustrations  of  the  dangers 
incident  to  freedom  of  thought ;  the  Peasants'  War  was  made  to  point  a 
moral  which  appealed  to  the  jealousy  of  nobles  and  the  ambitions  of 
Kings ;  the  rise  of  sectaries  and  the  multiplication  of  sects  were  em- 
ployed to  set  off  the  excellence  of  a  uniform  faith  and  an  infallible 
Cliurch  ;  the  abolition  of  priesthood  and  hierarchy  was  used  to  unchurch 


Contrast  between  Luther  and  Zivingli  345 

the  heretic  and  deny  to  his  societies  both  divine  authority  and  sacra- 
mental grace.  Revival  and  reaction  followed  so  fast  on  the  heels  of 
reform  that,  had  the  Lutheran  Church  stood  alone,  neither  the  eloquence 
of  its  founder,  nor  the  sagacity  and  steadfastness  of  the  Saxon  Electors, 
nor  the  vigour  of  Landgrave  Philip  could  have  saved  it. 

But  Luther  did  not  exhaust  the  tendencies  that  worked  for  Reform. 
They  were  impersonated  also  in  Zwingli.  x\s  the  one  was  by  disposi- 
tion and  discipline  a  schoolman  who  loved  the  Saints  and  the  Sacraments 
of  the  Church,  the  other  was  a  humanist  who  appreciated  the  thinkers 
of  antiquity  and  the  reason  in  whose  name  they  spoke.  Luther  never 
escaped  from  the  feelings  of  the  monk  and  the  associations  of  the  cloister; 
but  Zwingli  studied  his  New  Testament  with  a  fine  sense  of  the  sanity  of 
its  thought,  the  combined  purity  and  practicability  of  its  ideals,  and  the 
majesty  of  its  spirit ;  and  his  ambition  was  to  realise  a  religion  after  its 
model,  free  from  the  traditions  and  superstitious  of  men.  It  was  this 
that  made  him  so  tolerant  of  Luther,  and  Luther  so  intolerant  of  him. 
The  differences  of  opinion  might  have  been  transcended,  but  the  dif- 
ferences of  character  were  insuperable.  The  two  men  stood  for  distinct 
ideals  and  different  realities ;  and  as  they  differed  so  did  their  peoples. 
Differences  of  political  order,  geographical  situation,  and  climate  could 
not  but  reappear  in  character  and  in  belief  as  well  as  in  the  forms  under 
which  these  were  co-ordinated  and  expressed.  Ecclesiastical  order  will 
ever  reflect  the  civil  polity  prevailing  in  the  region  where  it  is  evolved. 
Thus  the  Roman  Church  was  built  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Roman  Empire; 
the  Eastern  patriarchates  were  organised  according  to  the  methods  and 
the  offices  of  Byzantine  rule ;  and  the  ecclesiastical  institutions  of  the 
sixteenth  century  were  shaped  by  the  political  capacities  and  usages  of 
the  peoples  among  whom  and  for  whom  they  were  created.  Thus  the 
Church  adapted  to  a  German  kingdom  was  not  suited  to  the  temper 
and  ways  of  an  ancient  republic  ;  nor  was  a  system  fitted  to  a  despotic 
State  congenial  to  the  genius  of  a  free  people.  Hence  there  emerged  a 
twofold  difference  between  the  Reformations  accomplished  by  Luther  and 
by  Zwingli  :  one  personal,  whicli  mainly  affected  the  faith  or  creed  of 
the  Church,  another  social  or  civil,  which  mainly  affected  its  polity. 
Luther,  a  schoolman  while  a  Reformer,  created  out  of  his  learning  and 
experience  a  faith  suited  to  his  personal  needs  ;  but  Zwingli,  a  Reformer 
because  a  humanist,  came  to  religion  through  the  literature  which 
embodied  the  mind  of  Christ  and  the  Church  of  the  Apostles.  Hence, 
the  Lutheran  Reformation  is  less  radical  and  complete  than  the 
Zwinglian,  while  its  faith  is  more  traditional  and  less  historical  and 
rational.  But  the  differences  due  to  the  j)olitical  order  and  the  civil 
usage  were,  if  not  deeper,  yet  more  divisive.  Luther  effected  his  change 
under  an  empire  and  within  a  kingdom  by  the  help  of  Princes  and 
nobles ;  but  Zwingli  effected  his  under  a  republic  by  the  aid  of  citizens 
with  whom  he  had  to  argue  as  with  consciously  freeborn  men.     Both 


346  The  French  Reformation 

might  organise  their  respective  Churches  by  means  of  the  civil  power 
and  in  dependence  on  it  ;  but  the  civil  powers  were  not  the  same,  the 
reigning  forces  being  in  the  one  case  the  law  and  the  princely  Avill,  and 
in  the  other  case  the  reason  and  the  free  choice  of  men  trained  in  self- 
government  by  the  usages  of  centuries.  The  Lutheran  Church  was  thus 
more  monarchical,  the  Zwinglian  more  republican  in  constitution  ;  the 
one  was  constructed  by  Princes,  the  other  organised  by  the  genius  and 
built  by  the  hands  of  a  free  people. 

The  Reformation,  then,  could  not  possibly  be  expressed  in  a  single 
homogeneous  form.  Organisation  was  a  necessity,  if  the  liberty  achieved 
by  the  movement  was  to  be  preserved ;  but  it  is  a  much  harder  thing  to 
establish  an  order  agreeable  to  liberty  than  an  order  suitable  to  bondage. 
When  a  revolution  once  begins,  authorities,  personal  or  political,  may 
retard  or  deflect  it,  but  they  cannot  stop  or  turn  it  back.  And  no  revo- 
lution leaves  man  exactly  where  it  found  him  ;  the  wheel  may  accomplish 
its  full  round,  but  it  never  returns  to  the  point  whence  it  started.  If, 
then,  man  could  not  go  back  and  must  preserve  what  he  had  gained,  he 
needed  a  system  that  would  serve  his  new  mind  as  Catholicism  had  served 
his  old.  Out  of  Luther's  Reformation  came  the  Church  which  bears  his 
name ;  out  of  Zwingli's  the  Church  which  is  specially  termed  the  Re- 
formed. This  Church  was  born  in  Switzerland,  but  named  in  France ; 
and  the  name  signified  that  while  it  was  a  Church  Protestant  and 
Evangelical  like  the  Lutheran,  it  was  yet  ancient  and  continuous  like 
the  Roman,  able  to  change  its  form  or  accidents  without  losing  its 
essence.  Being  Swiss  by  birth  it  was  republican  in  polity  and  demo- 
cratic in  spirit,  a  Church  freely  chosen  by  a  free  people  and  capable 
of  living  amid  free  institutions.  But  France,  in  adopting  and  naming 
it,  made  it  less  national  and  more  cosmopolitan,  helping  it  to  realise 
a  character  at  once  more  comprehensive  and  aggressive.  Now,  the  causes 
of  this  action  may  be  described  as  at  once  general  and  particular,  or 
national  and  personal.  Of  the  more  general,  or  national,  causes  three 
may  here  be  specified. 

French  Protestantism  was  more  a  lay  than  a  clerical  revolt  ;  the  men 
who  led  and  who  formed  it  were  without  the  mental  habits  or  the 
associations  of  the  priest.  At  first  indeed  it  was  termed,  just  as  if  it 
had  been  imported  from  Germany,  "the  Lutheran  heresy";  but  the 
most  notable  of  the  early  French  martyrs,  Louis  de  Berquin,  was  a  pupil 
of  Erasmus  rather  than  of  Luther.  The  men  who  made  the  psalms 
which  the  French  Protestants  loved  to  sing,  were  not  of  the  priestly 
order,  while  their  two  most  illustrious  teachers  were  both  jurists  and 
scholars.  It  was  then  but  characteristic  that  the  Reformed  Church 
of  France  should  more  emphasise  moral  character  and  temper  than 
custom  or  formulated  beliefs,  and  that  John  Calvin,  who  was  its  most 
creative  personality,  should  not  think  like  a  schoolman  or  appeal  to  the 


Persecution  in  France  347 

Imitatio  Christi  as  Luther  had  appealed  to  the  Theologia  Germanica. 
Its  genius  was  to  sacrifice  everytliing  which  Scripture  did  not  directly 
sanction  and  justify ;  while  the  genius  of  the  Lutheran  Church  was  to 
spare  everything  that  Scripture  did  not  expressly  forbid.  And  these 
differences  were  felt  and  resented  by  the  Lutherans  long  before  they  were 
perceived  or  appreciated  by  the  Catholics ;  for  one  of  the  most  tragic 
things  of  history  is  the  jealousy  which  made  the  Lutherans  so  fear  the 
Reformed  Church  that  they  would  at  one  time  rather  have  seen  Rome 
than  Geneva  victorious. 

Again,  the  Reformed  Church  in  France  had  to  live  in  the  face  of  a 
persecution  so  severe  and  a  legislation  so  repressive  as  to  be  without 
parallel  in  the  annals  of  any  civilised  country.  Certainly,  in  the  case  of 
the  early  Church  the  martyrdoms  were  numerically  fewer,  while  its  suffer- 
ings were  less  continuous  and  its  period  of  persecution  not  so  unbroken 
and  protracted.  The  Roman  amphitheatre  was,  compared  with  the 
Place  Maubert,-  a  home  of  mild  humanity ;  the  gay  and  careless  in- 
tolerance of  Francis  I  had  nothing  to  learn  from  pagan  hate,  while  the 
Inquisition  was  a  fiercer  and  more  pitiless  foe  than  heathenism  could 
have  bred.  The  first  martyrdoms  took  place  in  1523  at  Meaux  and  at 
Paris ;  by  1526  they  had  become  common.  An  eye-witness  tells  us 
that  in  six  months  — 1534-5 —  in  Paris  alone  twenty-seven  persons  were 
burned  to  death.  And  in  1568,  as  if  to  show  how  the  thirst  for  blood 
had  grown,  two  Huguenot  writers  assure  us  that,  during  the  short  peace, 
in  three  months  more  than  "ten  thousand"  people  were  slain,  a  statement 
which  the  testimony  of  the  Venetian  ambassador  abundantly  confirms. 
In  1581  a  book  dedicated  to  Henry  III  places  the  number  who  had  fallen 
within  the  few  preceding  years  for  the  "  Religion "  at  two  hundred 
thousand,  and  it  goes  on  to  enumerate  the  victims  provided  by  the 
larger  Churches. 

These  figures  may  be  exaggerated ;  but  the  exaggerations,  which  are 
those  of  contemporaries,  will  seem  extravagant  only  to  those  who  have 
never  looked  into  the  records  of  congregations  and  classes.  In  any  case 
the  figures  witness  to  the  fierceness  of  the  fires  that  scorched  the  Reformed 
Church  in  France,  and  explain  if  they  do  not  justify  "its  passion  of 
religious  hate,"  -while  they  drew  to  it  the  pity  and  awakened  for  it  the 
admiration  of  all  its  sister  and  daughter  communities.  To  define  policy 
and  shape  character  in  their  own  and  other  lands,  for  their  own  and  later 
ages,  has  ever  been  the  prerogative  of  the  persecuted.  And  this  pre- 
rogative the  Huguenot  has  exercised  as  a  splendid  revenge.  LLe  had  no 
opportunity  of  becoming  a  lo3^al  citizen ;  the  State  would  not  allow  him. 
L'Hopital  laid  down  the  principle  that  there  could  be  no  civil  unity 
where  there  was  religious  dissension ;  and  that  the  city  which  allowed 
its  citizens  to  disagree  in  their  theological  beliefs  could  know  no  peace. 
While  he  urged  the  sectaries  to  cultivate  charity,  and  cease  to  use  the 
'•'•mots  diaboliques''  which  they  flung  at  each  other,  and  to  employ  instead 


348      Characteristics  of  the  French  Reformed  Church 

the  truest  and  most  characteristic  of  names — "  Christian,"  yet  his  thought 
translated  into  hiw  rendered,  so  far  as  the  Huguenot  was  concerned,  duty  to 
the  State  and  duty  to  conscience  incompatible.  And  the  tragic  struggle 
in  which  the  Huguenot  was  engaged  made  him  a  heroic  and  a  potent 
fio-ure.  What  the  French  Revolution  did  later  for  the  European  peoples, 
the  Huguenot  did  for  Protestantism.  He  made  his  faith  illustrious ;  his 
example  became  infectious,  and  the  Churches  of  other  lands  loved  to 
emulate  the  Reformed  Church  of  France.  And  this  effect  was  at  once 
intensified  and  heightened  by  the  expulsive  power  of  the  anti-Protestant 
legislation.  It  drove  men  out  of  France  without  expelling  their  love  of 
France  ;  they  only  loved  her  the  more  that  she  had  made  them  fugitives 
for  conscience'  sake.  Men  like  John  Calvin  and  Theodore  Beza  did  not 
cease  to  be  sons  of  France  though  they  became  citizens  of  Geneva  ;  and 
they  used  their  foreign  citizenship  to  serve  their  mother  land  more 
effectually  than  they  could  have  done  in  any  of  her  own  cities.  The 
Protestants  failed  in  France,  yet  it  is  doubtful  v/hether  without  their 
failure  there  the  Reformed  Church  could  have  prospered.  The  events 
that  so  tended  to  define  its  creed  and  demeanour,  helped  it  to  fight  its 
battles  the  more  bravely. 

Finally,  the  Reformed  Church  as  organised  by  the  French  mind 
belongs  essentially  to  the  second  Protestant  generation,  and  its  distinctive 
note  was  an  enlarged  historical  knowledge  and  a  clarified  historical 
sense.  The  feeling  for  religion  was  in  the  second  generation  not  less 
strong  than  in  the  first ;  but  it  knew  better  the  problem  to  be  solved  and 
had  become  more  conscious  of  the  many  and  complex  factors  required 
for  its  solution.  The  new  literature  had  almost  nothing  to  do  with 
determining  the  minds  and  motives  of  the  earlier  Reformers ;  but 
determined  almost  exclusively  those  of  the  later.  With  the  exception  of 
Melanchthon  no  Lutheran  of  the  front  rank  came  from  the  humanists, 
but  all  the  creative  minds  of  the  Reformed  Church  were  children  of  the 
Renaissance.  The  problem  as  they  saw  it  was  historical  and  literary  as 
well  as  religious.  The  Old  Testament  wdnch  Reuchlin  had  recovered 
and  the  New  Testament  which  Erasmus  had  published  and  interpreted 
enabled  them  to  study  both  the  religion  which  Christ  had  found  and 
the  religion  which  He  had  made  ;  the  Apostolic  writings  showed  how  the 
men  who  knew  Him  or  Mdio  knew  those  who  knew  Him  understood  and 
tried  to  realise  His  mind.  Their  own  experience  had  set  them  face  to 
face  with  a  Church  and  system  which  claimed  to  express  the  mind  of 
the  Apostles  and  to  represent  the  apostolical  society.  They  were  not 
curious  and  scientific  enquirers  who  wished  to  discover  how  the  one  had 
become  the  other,  or  how  the  twin  laws  of  continuity  and  change  had 
fulfilled  themselves  in  history ;  they  were  convinced  and  sincere  religious 
men,  who  studied  first  the  Scriptures  to  find  the  idea  of  Christ,  and  then 
their  own  times  to  see  wliether  it  had  been  and  how  it  could  be  realised. 

There  was  thus  an  objectivity  in  the  Reformed  ideal  which  was  absent 


1509]  Influence  of  Calvin  349 

from  the  Lutheran  ;  a  greater  thoroughness,  a  more  comprehensive  spirit, 
a  more  conscious  and  coherent  endeavour  to  repeat  and  reflect  the  Apo- 
stolic age.  Tlie  Reformed  Church  was  not  built  to  meet  the  exigencies  of 
an  expanding  personal  experience,  but  articulated  throughout  according 
to  a  consciously  conceived  idea.  It  bore  indeed  even  more  than  the 
Lutheran  the  impress  of  a  single  mind  ;  but  then  that  mind  was  as  typical 
of  France  and  tlie  second  Protestant  generation  as  Luther  was  typical 
of  Germany  and  the  first  ;  and  it  had  come  by  a  very  different  process 
and  way  to  the  convictions  which  drove  it  into  action.  Calvin,  like 
Zwingli,  was  a  humanist  before  he  became  a  Reformer,  and  what  he  Avas 
at  first  he  never  ceased  to  be.  On  the  intellectual  side,  as  a  scholar  and 
thinker,  his  affinities  were  with  Erasmus,  though  on  the  religious  side 
they  were  rather  with  Luther  ;  indeed,  Calvin  can  hardly  be  better 
described  than  by  saying  that  his  mind  was  the  mind  of  Erasmus,  though 
his  faith  and  conscience  were  those  of  Luther.  He  had  the  clear  reason 
and  the  open  vision  of  the  one,  but  the  religious  fire  and  moral  passion 
of  the  other.  The  conscience  made  the  intellect  constructive,  the  intellect 
made  the  conscience  imperious  —  at  once  individual,  architectonic,  and 
collective.  In  Calvin  the  historical  sense  of  the  Immanist,  and  the 
spiritual  passion  of  the  Reformer,  are  united  ;  he  knows  the  sacred 
literature  which  his  reason  has  analysed,  while  his  imagination  has  seen 
the  Apostolic  Church  as  an  ideal  which  his  conscience  feels  bound  to 
realise.  There  was  rigorous  logic  in  all  he  did  ;  dialectic  governed  him, 
from  the  humanism  which  furnished  his  premisses  to  the  religion  which 
built  up  his  conclusions.  This  is  the  man  whom  we  must  learn  to  know, 
if  we  would  understand  the  Reformed  Church,  what  it  did,  and  what  it 
became  in  his  hands. 

The  personal  cause,  then,  Avliich  most  of  all  contributed  to  the 
creation  of  the  Reformed  Church,  as  history  knows  it,  is  John  Calvin  ; 
and  him  we  must  here  attempt  to  understand  from  two  points  of  view  : 
first,  that  of  descent  and  education  ;  secondly,  that  of  the  place  and 
sphere  in  which  he  did  his  work. 

Calvin  was  born  on  July  10,  1509,  at  Noyon,  in  Picard}^  It  was 
the  year  when  Henry  VIII  had  succeeded  to  the  English  throne  ;  when 
Colet  was  meditating  the  formation  of  a  school  which  v/as  to  bear  the 
name  of  the  Apostle  whom  he  loved  ;  when  Erasmus,  learned  and  famous, 
was  in  Rome,  holding  high  argument  witli  the  Cardinal  de'  Medici  ; 
when  Luther  attained  the  dignity  of  Sententiarius^  and  had  been  called 
to  Wittenberg  ;  and  when  Melanchtlion,  though  only  a  boy  of  thirteen, 
matriculated  at  Heidelberg.  Calvin's  ancestors  had  been  bargemen  on 
the  Oise  ;  but  his  father,  Gerard  Calvin,  had  forsaken  the  ancestral  craft, 
and  had  sometime  before  1481  migrated  from  Pont  I'Eveque  to  Noyon, 
where  he  had  prospered,  and  had  in  due  course  become  Notaire  aposto- 
lique,  Procureur  fiscal  du  Comte,  Scribe  en  Cour  d'JEglise,  Secretaire  de 


350  Early  years  of  Calvin  [1509-23 

VEvesche^  et  Promoteur  du  Chapitre.  He  married  Jeanne  le  Franc,  the 
daughter  of  a  Avell-to-do  and  retired  innkeeper,  described  b}'  a  Catholic 
historian  as  a  "  most  beautiful  woman,"  and  by  a  local  tradition  as 
"remarkably  devout."  Beza  says  that  the  family  was  honourable  and 
of  moderate  means  ;  and  he  adds  that  the  father  was  a  man  of  good 
understanding  and  counsel,  and  therefore  much  in  request  among  the 
neighbouring  nobility.  To  this  couple  were  born  four  sons  and  two 
daughters,  John  being  the  second  son.  The  father,  who  intended  the 
boy  for  the  Church,  had  the  successful  man's  belief  in  a  liberal  education, 
and  obtained  for  him,  just  as  the  modern  father  seeks  a  scliolarship  or 
exhibition,  first,  the  revenues  of  a  chapel  in  the  cathedral,  and  some 
years  later  those  of  a  neighbouring  curacy.  Among  the  local  gentry 
was  the  distinguished  family  of  Montmor.  One  of  them,  Charles  de 
Hangest,  was  from  1501  to  1525  Bishop  of  Noyon  ;  and  his  nephew 
Jean  held  the  same  episcopate  for  the  succeeding  fifty-two  years.  This 
Jean  quarrelled  lustily  with  the  Chapter,  which  disliked  his  manners,  his 
dress,  his  beard,  and  possibly  also  the  tolerance  of  heresy  which  made 
him  "  suspect  dans  safoi  et  odieux  a  VEglise  et  a  lEHat.^''  It  is  probable 
that  his  friendship  with  this  episcopal  race  helped  Gerard  to  rise, 
and  also  hastened  his  fall.  Whatever  the  cause  —  whether  financial 
embarrassments,  personal  attachments,  dubious  orthodoxy,  or  all  three 
combined  — his  later  years  were  more  troubled  than  his  earlier  ;  and  he 
died  in  1531  under  the  Ban  of  the  Church.  There  is  no  evidence  of  any 
latent  Protestantism  either  in  him  or  in  his  family  at  this  time,  though 
four  years  later  John  had  become  the  hope  of  the  stern  and  unbending 
Reformers,  and  within  five  years  the  eldest  son  Charles  had  died  as  une 
dme  damnee^  for  he  refused  on  his  deathbed  to  receive  the  Sacraments  of 
the  Church. 

Calvin's  education  began  in  the  bosom  of  the  Montmor  family,  not 
indeed  as  a  matter  of  charity,  but,  as  Beza  tells  us,  at  the  charges  of  his 
father  ;  and  tliough  Calvin  never  forgot  that  he  was  "  unus  de  plehe 
homuncio,^^  yet  he  was  always  grateful  for  the  early  associations  which 
gave  to  his  mind  and  bearing  a  characteristic  distinction.  In  1523  he 
was  sent  to  Paris,  where  he  entered  as  a  student  of  Arts  the  College 
de  la  Marche,  whence  he  passed,  for  his  later  and  more  special  studies, 
to  the  College  de  Montaigu.  The  University  of  Paris  was  old  and 
famous,  but  its  then  state  was  not  equal  to  its  age  or  its  fame.  Erasmus 
describes  how  the  students  were  mobbed  and  hunted  on  the  streets, 
the  sort  of  houses,  no  better  than  lupanaria,  which  they  frequented  or 
lodged  in,  the  filthy  language  they  heard  or  used,  the  still  filthier  deeds 
they  were  expected  to  do  or  suffer.  Rabelais'  Panurge  comes  to  Paris 
skilled  in  a  host  of  tongues,  but  malfaisant,  pipeur,  heuveur,  bateur  de 
pavSz^  ribleur,  averse  to  no  form  of  mischief  or  pruriency.  James 
Dryander,  brother  of  Francis,  one  of  Calvin's  innumerable  correspondents, 
describes  the  proeceptorculi  and  the  magistelli   of   the    University  as 


1523]  Calvin  and  Ms  friends  351 

amazing  the  students  by  the  impudence  and  ineptitude  with  which  they 
explained  authors  whom  they  did  not  understand.  And  how  did  the 
boy  of  fourteen  conduct  himself  in  this,  to  him,  strange  atmosphere? 
We  need  not  trust  the  admiring  or  depreciative  narratives  of  later 
men ;  but  we  may  judge  the  lad  by  the  friends  he  made. 

Foremost  among  these  stand  the  four  Cops.  The  father,  Guillaume 
Cop,  the  King's  physician,  correspondent  of  Reuchlin  and  friend  of 
Erasmus,  who  praised  him  as  of  medicine  the  vindex  et  antistes^  and 
as  Musarum  cultor,  and  the  sons  —  Jean,  who  became  a  canon  of  the 
Church  ;  Nicolas,  who  in  1530  became  a  professor  of  j)hilosophy,  and  in 
1533  delivered  as  Rector  of  the  University  an  address  which  made  both 
him  and  Calvin  famous  ;  and  the  youngest  of  the  brothers,  Michel,  who 
followed  Calvin  to  Geneva  and  became  a  Protestant  pastor.  Beside  the 
Cops  there  stands  another  Erasmian,  Guillaume  Bude,  of  whom  Calvin  in 
his  earliest  work  spoke  as  '•''  primum  rei  literariae  decus  et  columen^  cuius 
beneficio  palmam  eruditionis  hodie  sihi  vendicat  nostra  Gallia.''^  One  of 
the  regents  of  the  College  de  la  Marche  was  Mathurin  Cordier,  an 
enthusiastic  teacher  who  loved  learning  and  learners,  and  whose  keen 
eye  saw  the  rich  promise  hidden  in  his  new  scholar.  The  relations  of 
master  and  pupil  were  almost  ideal.  Calvin  never  ceased  to  regard 
Cordier  with  affection,  dedicating  to  him  in  profound  but  reserved 
gratitude  one  of  his  commentaries  ;  Cordier  ever  respected  Calvin,  and 
showed  his  respect  by  becoming,  like  him,  a  Protestant,  and  following 
him  to  Geneva,  where  he  died,  though  thirty -two  years  Calvin's  senior, 
in  the  same  year  as  his  quondam  pupil. 

And  here,  perhaps,  we  may  most  fitly  glance  at  the  commonest  of  all 
the  charges  brought  against  Calvin.  He  is  said  to  have  been  even 
then  austere,  severe,  harsh,  intolerant,  inaccessible  to  the  softer  emotions, 
well  entitled  to  bear  the  name  which  the  playful  companions  of  his  youth 
gave  him,  "the  Accusative."  But  how  stand  the  facts?  There  is  no 
scholar  of  his  time  more  distinguished  by  his  willingness  to  serve  friends 
or  his  power  to  attach  and  bind  them  to  himself  by  bands  of  steel.  Of 
the  de  Montmors,  with  whom  he  was  educated,  almost  all,  in  spite  of 
high  ecclesiastical  connexions  and  hopes,  became  Protestants,  while  to  his 
old  fellow-pupil,  Claude,  he  dedicated  the  firstfruits  of  his  literary  genius. 
The  Cops  and  Cordier  have  already  been  noticed  ;  and,  though  I3ude  did 
not  himself  cease  to  be  a  Catholic,  yet  his  wife  and  famil}^  all  became 
Protestants,  five  of  them  on  his  death  in  15-19  seeking  refuge  in  Geneva. 
Another  early  teacher  whom  Calvin  deeply  revered,  expressing  his 
reverence  in  one  of  his  most  characteristic  dedications,  was  the  Lutheran 
Melchior  Wolmar,  to  whom  he  owed  his  introduction  to  the  Greek 
language  and  literature.  But  if  one  would  understand  the  young  Calvin, 
one  must  study  him  as  revealed  in  his  letters  to  friends  and  companions 
like  Frangois  Connan,  whom  he  describes  as  the  wisest  and  most  learned 
of  men,  whom  he  trusts  above  all  others,  and  whose  advice  he  rejoices  to 


352  Legal  studies.      The  De  Clementia         [1528-32 

follow ;  or  Frangois  Daniel,  whom  Calvin  salutes  as  "  amice  incompara- 
hilis"  or  as  '•'■/rater  et  amice  integerrime''' ;  or  Nicolas  du  Chemin, 
whom  he  rallies  on  his  literary  ambitions,  and  addresses  as  "  mea  vita 
eharior"  The  man  is  here  revealed  as  nature  made  him,  and  before 
he  had  to  struggle  against  grim  death  for  what  was  dearer  to  him 
than  life  ;  affectionate  and  delicate,  not  in  body,  but  in  spirit. 

In  1528  Calvin's  father,  perhaps  illuminated  by  the  disputes  in  his 
Cathedral  Chapter,  discovered  that  the  law  was  a  surer  road  to  wealth 
and  honour  than  the  Church,  and  decided  that  his  son  should  leave 
theology  for  jurisprudence.  The  son,  nothing  loth,  obeyed,  and  left 
Paris  for  Orleans,  possibly,  as  he  descended  the  steps  of  the  College  de 
Montaigu,  brushing  shoulders  with  a  Spanish  freshman  named  Ignatius 
Loyola.  In  Orleans  Calvin  studied  law  under  Pierre  de  I'Estoile,  who  is 
described  as  jurisconsultorum  G-allorum  facile  princeps^  and  as  eclipsing 
in  classical  knowledge  Reuchlin,  Aleander,  and  Erasmus  ;  and  Greek 
under  Wolmar,  in  whose  house  he  met  for  the  first  time  Theodore  Beza, 
then  a  boy  about  ten  years  of  age.  After  a  year  in  Orleans  he  went  to 
Bourges,  attracted  by  the  fame  of  the  Italian  jurist  Alciati,  whose 
ungainliness  of  body  and  speech  and  vanity  of  mind  his  students  loved 
to  satirise  and  even  by  occasional  rebellion  to  chasten.  In  1531  Gerard 
Calvin  died  and  his  son  in  1532  published  his  first  work,  a  Commentary 
on  Seneca's  De  Clementia.  His  purpose  has  been  construed  by  the  light 
of  his  later  career  ;  and  some  have  seen  in  the  book  a  veiled  defence  of 
the  Huguenot  martyrs,  others  a  cryptic  censure  of  Francis  I,  and  yet 
others  a  prophetic  dissociation  of  himself  from  Stoicism.  But  there  is 
no  mystery  in  the  matter ;  the  work  is  that  of  a  scholar  who  has  no 
special  interest  in  either  theology  or  the  Bible.  This  may  be  statistically 
illustrated  :  Calvin  cites  twenty-two  Greek  authors  and  fifty -five  Latin, 
the  quotations  being  most  abundant  and  from  many  books  ;  but  in  his 
whole  treatise  there  are  only  three  Biblical  texts  expressly  cited,  and 
those  from  the  Vulgate.  The  man  is  cultivated  and  learned,  writes 
elegant  Latin,  is  a  good  judge  of  Latinity,  criticises  like  any  modern  the 
mind  and  style,  the  knowledge  and  philosophy,  the  manner,  the  purpose, 
and  the  ethical  ideas  of  Seneca  ;  but  the  passion  for  religion  has  not  as 
yet  penetrated  as  it  did  later  into  his  very  bones.  Erasmus  is  in  Calvin's 
eyes  the  ornament  of  letters,  though  his  large  edition  of  Seneca  is  not 
all  it  ought  to  have  been  ;  but  even  Erasmus  could  not  at  twenty-three 
have  produced  a  work  so  finished  in  its  scholarship,  so  real  in  its 
learning,  or  so  wide  in  its  outlook. 

What  gives  the  book  significance  is  the  nature  that  shines  through 
it  ;  the  humanist  is  a  man  with  a  passion  for  conduct,  moral,  veracious, 
strenuous,  who  has  loved  labour  and  bestowed  it  without  grudging  on 
the  classical  writer  with  whom  he  has  most  affinity.  Of  the  twin  pillars 
of  Roman  philosophy  and  eloquence  Cicero  is  for  him  an  easy  first,  but 
Seneca  is  a  clear  second.     Calvin  is  here  at  once  a  jurist  and  a  scholar, 


1532-3]  Moral  attitude  in  the  De  dementia  353 

but  amid  his  grammatical,  literary,  and  historical  discussions  —  every 
phrase  and  idea  interpreted  being  illustrated  from  classical  authorities  — 
he  speaks  his  mind  with  astonishing  courage  concerning  the  qualities 
and  faults  of  kings  and  judges.  States  and  societies.  He  bids  monarchs 
remember  that  their  best  guardians  are  not  armies  or  treasuries,  but  the 
fidelity  of  friends  and  the  love  of  subjects.  Arrogance  may  be  natural 
in  a  prince,  but  it  does  not  therefore  cease  to  be  an  evil.  A  sovereign 
may  ravage  like  a  wild  beast,  but  his  reign  will  be  robbery  and 
oppression,  and  the  robber  is  ever  the  enemy  of  man.  Cruelty  makes  a 
king  execrable  ;  and  he  will  be  loved  only  as  he  imitates  the  gentleness 
of  God.  And  so  clemency  is  true  humanity  ;  it  is  a  heroic  virtue,  hard 
to  practise,  yet  without  it  we  cannot  be  men.  And  he  uses  it  to  qualify 
the  Stoic  ethics  ;  pity  is  not  to  him  a  disease  of  the  soul,  it  is  a  sign  and 
condition  of  health  ;  no  good  man  is  wdthout  pity  ;  the  Athenians  did 
well  when  they  built  an  altar  to  this  virtue.  Cicero  and  even  Juvenal 
teach  us  that  it  is  a  vice  not  to  be  able  to  weep.  iVnd  the  doctrine 
becomes  in  Calvin's  hands  social  ;  man  pitiful  to  men  will  be  sensible  of 
their  rights  and  his  own  duties.  Conscience  is  necessary  for  us,  but  his 
good  name  is  necessary  to  our  neighbour  ;  and  we  must  not  so  follow 
our  conscience  as  to  injure  his  good  name.  We  ought  so  to  follow  nature 
that  others  may  see  the  reason  in  the  nature  that  we  follow.  He  can  be 
humorous,  and  laughs  at  the  ridiculous  ceremonies  which  accompanied 
the  apotheosis  of  Caesar,  or  at  the  soothsayers  who  prophesied  without 
smiling  ;  but  he  is  usually  serious  and  grave,  criticising  Seneca  for 
speaking  of  Fortune  instead  of  God,  and  the  Stoics  for  doctrines  which 
make  human  nature  good,  yet  isolate  the  good  man  from  mankind. 
The  ethics  of  the  Stoics  he  loved,  but  not  their  metaphysics  ;  their 
moral  individualism  and  their  forensic  morality  he  admired,  but  the 
defects  of  their  social  and  collective  ideals  he  deplored  and  condemned. 
The  humanist  is  alive  with  moral  and  political  enthusiasm,  but  the 
Reformer  is  not  yet  born. 

The  events  of  the  next  few  months  are  obscure,  but  we  know  enough 
to  see  how  forces,  internal  and  external,  were  working  towards  change.  In 
the  second  half  of  1532  and  the  earlier  half  of  1533  Calvin  was  in  Orleans, 
studying,  teaching,  practising  the  law,  and  acting  in  the  University  as 
Proctor  for  the  Picard  nation ;  then  he  went  to  Noyon,  and  in  October 
he  was  once  more  in  Paris.  The  capital  was  agitated  ;  Francis  was 
absent,  and  his  sister,  Margaret  of  Navarre,  held  her  Court  there, 
favouring  the  new  doctrines,  encouraging  the  preachers,  the  chief  among 
them  being  her  own  almoner,  Gerard  Roussel.  Two  letters  of  Calvin 
to  Francis  Daniel  belong  to  this  date  and  place  ;  and  in  them  we  find 
a  changed  note.  One  speaks  of  "  the  troublous  times,"  and  the  other 
narrates  two  events  :  first,  it  describes  a  play  "  pungent  with  gall  and 
vinegar,"  which  the  students  had  performed  in  the  College  of  Navarre 
to  satirise  the  Queen  ;  and  secondly,  the   action    of   certain    factious 


354  Cop^s  address.     Flight  of  Calvin  [i533-4 

theologians  who  had  prohibited  Margaret's  Mirror  of  a  Sinful  Soul. 
She  had  complained  to  the  King,  and  he  had  intervened.  The  matter 
came  before  the  University,  and  Nicolas  Cop,  the  Rector,  had  spoken 
strongly  against  the  arrogant  doctors  and  in  defence  of  the  Queen, 
''  mother  of  all  the  virtues  and  of  all  good  learning."  Le  Clerc,  a  parish 
priest,  the  author  of  the  mischief,  defended  his  performance  as  a  task  to 
which  he  had  been  formally  appointed,  praising  the  King,  the  Queen  as 
woman  and  as  author,  contrasting  her  book  with  "such  an  obscene 
production  "  as  Pantagruel,  and  finally  saying  that  the  book  had  been 
published  without  the  approval  of  the  faculty  and  was  set  aside  only  as 
•'  liable  to  suspicion."" 

Two  or  three  days  later,  on  November  1,  1533,  came  the  famous 
rectorial  address  which  Calvin  wrote,  and  Cop  revised  and  delivered  ; 
and  which  shows  how  far  the  humanist  had  travelled  since  April  4, 
1532,  the  date  of  the  Be  Clementia.  He  is  now  alive  to  the  religious 
question,  though  he  has  not  carried  it  to  its  logical  and  practical 
conclusion.  Two  fresh  influences  have  evidently  come  into  his  life, 
the  New  Testament  of  Erasmus  and  certain  sermons  by  Luther.  The 
exordium  of  the  address  reproduces,  almost  literally,  some  sentences  from 
Erasmus'  Paraclesis,  including  those  which  unfold  his  idea  of  the 
pJdlosophia  Christiana  ;  while  the  body  of  it  repeats  Luther's  exposition 
of  the  Beatitudes  and  his  distinction  between  Law  and  Gospel,  Avith  the 
involved  doctrines  of  Grace  and  Faith.  Yet  "  Ave  gratia  'plena "  is 
retained  in  tlie  exordium  ;  and  at  the  end  the  peacemakers  are  praised, 
who  follow  the  example  of  Christ  and  contend  not  with  the  sword  but 
with  the  word  of  truth. 

This  address  enables  us  to  seize  Calvin  in  the  very  act  and  article  of 
change  ;  he  has  come  under  a  double  influence.  Erasmus  has  compelled 
him  to  compare  the  ideal  of  Christ  with  the  Church  of  his  own  day  ;  and 
Luther  has  given  him  a  notion  of  Grace  which  has  convinced  his  reason 
and  taken  possession  of  his  imagination.  He  has  thus  ceased  to  be 
a  humanist  and  a  Papist,  but  has  not  yet  become  a  Reformer.  And 
a  Reformer  was  precisely  what  his  conscience,  his  country,  and  his 
reason  compelled  him  to  become.  Francis  was  flagrantly  immoral,  but 
a  fanatic  in  religion  ;  and  mercy  was  not  a  virtue  congenial  to  either 
Church  or  State.  Calvin  had  seen  the  Protestants  from  within  ;  he  knew 
their  honesty,  their  honour,  the  purity  of  their  motives,  and  the  integrity 
of  their  lives  ;  and  he  judged,  as  a  jurist  would,  that  a  man  who  had 
all  the  virtues  of  citizenship  ought  not  to  be  op]3ressed  and  treated  as 
unfit  for  civil  office  or  even  as  a  criminal  by  the  State.  This  is  no 
conjecture,  for  it  is  confirmed  by  the  testimony  he  bears  to  the  influence 
exercised  over  him  by  the  martyred  Etienne  de  la  Forge.  He  thus  saw 
that  a  changed  mind  meant  a  changed  religion,  and  a  changed  religion 
a  change  of  abode.     Cop  had  to  flee  from  Paris,  and  so  had  Calvin. 

In  the  May  of  1534  he  went  to  Noyon,  laid  down  his  offices,  was 


1534]  Calvin  at  Basel  355 

imprisoned,  liberated,  and  while  there  he  seems  to  have  finally  renounced 
Catholicism.  But  he  feared  the  forces  of  disorder  which  lurked  in 
Protestantism,  and  which  seemed  embodied  in  the  Anabaptists.  Hence 
at  Orleans  he  composed  a  treatise  against  one  of  their  favourite  beliefs, 
the  sleep  of  the  soul  between  death  and  judgment.  Conscious  personal 
being  was  in  itself  too  precious,  and  in  the  sight  of  God  too  sacred,  to  be 
allowed  to  suffer  even  a  temporary  lapse.  But  to  serve  the  cause  he  loved 
was  impossible  with  the  stake  waiting  for  him,  its  fires  scorching  his 
face,  and  kindly  friends  endangered  b}^  his  presence.  And  so  in  the 
winter  of  1534  he  retired  from  France  and  settled  at  Basel. 

Aeneas  Sylvius  had  once  described  Basel  as  a  city  which  venerated 
images,  but  cared  little  for  science,  and  had  no  wish  to  know  letters  ; 
and  when  he  became  Pope  he  founded  there  a  University  which  effected 
a  more  marvellous  change  than  he  coidd  have  anticipated.  Erasmus 
chose  Basel  as  his  residence  from  1514  to  1529  ;  and  here  his  Ncav 
Testament  and  his  editions  of  the  great  Latin  Fathers  were  printed  by 
John  Froben,  who  joined  to  the  soul  of  an  artist  the  enterprise  of  a 
merchant.  When  Froben  died  Erasmus  forsook  Basel  ;  but  as  the  end 
drew  near  he  came  back,  just  as  Calvin  was  finishing  his  Institution  to 
die  in  the  city  which  had  been  the  scene  of  his  most  arduous  and  fruitful 
labours.  And  if  the  zeal  for  learning  at  Basel  was  strong,  the  zeal  for 
religion  was  no  less.  As  early  as  1517  Capito  had  refused  to  celebrate  the 
Mass,  and  had  preached  in  the  spirit  of  Luther.  Here  OEcolampadius 
had  learned  from  humanism  a  sweet  reasonableness  that  won  the  respect 
of  Erasmus,  yet  ideas  so  radical  that  they  placed  him  beside  Zwingli  at 
Marburg,  and  made  him  so  preach  against  the  images  which  the  city 
used  to  venerate  that  the  rabble  hastened  to  insult  and  break  them. 
Erasmus,  who  described  the  event  in  more  than  one  letter,  marvelled  in 
his  satirical  way  that  "  not  a  solitary  Saint  lifted  a  blessed  finger  "  to 
work  a  protecting  or  retributory  miracle  that  should  stay  or  avenge 
the  damage.  Calvin  did  not  reach  the  city  which  CEcolampadius  had 
changed  till  three  years  after  his  death  ;  but  the  Reformer  found  it 
guided  by  men  who  were  just  as  congenial  :  Oswald  Myconius,  the  chief 
pastor  and  preacher,  who,  even  amid  notable  differences,  continued  ever 
a  personal  friend  and  admirer  ;  Simon  Grynaeus,  a  learned  Grecian,  with 
whom  he  then  and  later  discussed,  as  he  himself  tells  us,  how  best  to 
study,  to  translate,  and  to  interpret  the  Scriptures;  Sebastian  Munster, 
professor  of  Hebrew,  just  seeing  through  the  press  his  Bihlia  Hehraica, 
praised  in  public  as  G-ermanorum  Esdras  et  Straho^  and  affectionately 
known  in  private  as  "  the  Rabbi,"  a  master  at  whose  feet  Calvin  could  sit 
without  shame  ;  Thomas  Platter,  once  a  poor  and  vagrant  scholar,  then 
professor  of  Greek,  but  now  a  printer  from  whose  press  the  Institutio 
was  soon  to  issue,  though  owing  to  financial  straits  not  so  soon  as  its 
anxious  author  would  have  liked.  Besides  the  residents,  famous  visitors 
came  to  Basel  :   from  Zurich  Henry  Bullinger,  who  was  there  just  at 


356  The  Letter  to  Francis  1  [lo3G 


this  time,  discussing  the  terms  of  the  First  Helvetic  Confession,  and 
twenty-one  years  later  reminded  Calvin  of  their  meeting  ;  and  Conrad 
Pellican,  who  saw  the  dying  Erasmus  and  heard  great  things  of  a  certain 
John  Calvin,  a  Frenchman  who  had  dared  to  write  plain  and  solid  truth 
to  the  French  King. 

Now  a  city  where  Protestantism  reigned,  where  learning  flourished, 
and  where  men  so  unlike  as  Erasmus  and  Farel  —  the  fervid  preacher  of 
Reform  —  could  do  their  work  unhindered,  was  certain  to  make  a  deep 
impression  on  a  fugitive  harassed  and  expatriated  on  account  of  religion  ; 
and  the  impression  it  made  can  be  read  in  the  Ohristianae  Religionis 
Institution  and  especially  in  the  prefatory  Letter  to  Francis  I.  Thii 
Institutio  is  Calvin's  positive  interpretation  of  the  Christian  religion  ; 
the  Letter  is  learned,  eloquent,  elegant,  dignified,  the  address  of  a  subject 
to  his  sovereign,  yet  of  a  subject  who  knows  that  his  place  in  the  State 
is  as  legal,  though  not  as  authoritative,  as  the  sovereign's.  It  throbs 
with  a  noble  indignation  against  injustice,  and  with  a  noble  enthusiasm 
for  freedom  and  truth.  It  is  one  of  the  great  epistles  of  the  world,  a 
splendid  apology  for  the  oppressed  and  arraignment  of  the  oppressors. 
It  does  not  implore  toleration  as  a  concession,  but  claims  freedom  as  a 
right.  Its  author  is  a  young  man  of  but  twenty-six,  jQt  he  speaks  with 
the  gravity  of  age.  He  tells  the  King  that  his  first  duty  is  to  be  just  ; 
that  to  punish  unheard  is  but  to  inflict  violence  and  perpetrate  fraud. 
Those  for  wdiom  he  speaks  are,  though  simple  and  godly  men,  yet 
charged  with  crimes  that,  were  they  true,  ought  to  condemn  them  to 
a  thousand  fires  and  gibbets.  These  charges  the  King  is  bound  to 
investigate,  for  he  is  a  minister  of  God,  and  if  he  fails  to  serve  the 
God  whose  minister  he  is  then  he  is  a  robber  and  no  King.  The 
lowliness  of  the  men  has  as  its  counterpart  the  majesty  of  their  beliefs, 
for  the  sake  of  which  "  alii  nostrum  vinculis  constringuntur,  alii  virgis 
caeduntur,  alii  in  ludihrium  circumducuntur,  alii  proscribuntu?;  alii 
saevissime  torquentur,  alii  fuga  elabuntur^  omnes  rerum  angustia  pre- 
mimur^  diris  exsecralfionihus  devovennir,  maledictis  laceramm\  indignissimis 
modis  traetamur y  Then  he  asks,  "  Who  are  our  accusers  ?  "  and  he  turns 
on  the  priests  like  a  new  Erasmus,  who  does  not,  like  the  old,  delight  in 
satire  for  its  own  sake  or  in  a  literature  which  scourges  men  by  holding  up 
the  mirror  to  vice  ;  but  who  feels  the  sublimity  of  virtue  so  deeply  that 
witticisms  at  the  expense  of  vice  are  abhorrent  to  him.  He  takes  up  the 
charges  in  detail  :  it  is  said  that  the  doctrine  is  new,  doubtful,  and 
uncertain,  unconfirmed  by  miracles,  opposed  to  the  Fathers  and  ancient 
custom,  schismatical  and  productive  of  schism,  and  that  its  fruits  are 
sects,  seditions,  licence.  On  no  point  is  he  so  emphatic  as  the  repudiation 
of  the  personal  charges  :  the  people  he  pleads  for  have  never  raised  their 
voice  in  faction  or  sought  to  subvert  law  and  order  ;  they  fear  God 
sincerely  and  worship  Him  in  truth,  praying  even  in  exile  for  the  royal 
person  and  House. 


1536-9]        The  Christianae  Eeligionis  Institutio  357 

The  book  which  this  address  to  the  King  introduces  is  a  sketch 
or  programme  of  reform  in  religion.  The  first  edition  of  the  Institutio 
is  distinguished  from  all  later  editions  by  the  emphasis  it  lays,  not  on 
dogma,  but  on  morals,  on  worship,  and  on  polity.  Calvin  conceives  the 
Gospel  as  a  new  law  which  ought  to  be  embodied  in  a  new  life,  individual 
and  social.  What  came  later  to  be  known  as  Calvinism  may  be  stated 
in  an  occasional  sentence  or  implied  in  a  paragraph,  but  it  is  not  the 
substance  or  determinative  idea  of  the  book.  The  problem  discussed 
has  been  set  by  the  studies  and  the  experience  of  the  author  ;  he  has  read 
the  New  Testament  as  a  humanist  learned  in  the  law,  and  he  has  been 
startled  by  the  contrast  between  its  ideal  and  the  reality  which  confronts 
him.  And  he  proceeds  in  a  thoroughly  juridical  fashion,  just  as 
Tertullian  before  him,  and  as  Grotius  and  Selden  after  him.  Without 
a  document  he  can  decide  nothing  ;  he  needs  a  written  law  or  actual 
custom  ;  and  his  book  falls  into  divisions  which  these  suggest.  Hence 
his  first  chapter  is  concerned  with  duty  or  conduct  as  prescribed  by 
the  Ten  Commandments  ;  his  second  with  faith  as  contained  in  the 
Apostolic  symbol  ;  his  third  with  prayer  as  fixed  by  the  words  of  Christ ; 
his  fourth  with  the  Sacrament  as  given  in  the  Scriptures  ;  his  fifth  with 
the  false  sacraments  as  defined  by  tradition  and  enforced  by  Catholic 
custom  ;  and  his  sixth  with  Christian  liberty  or  the  relation  of  the 
ecclesiastical  and  civil  authorities.  But  though  the  book  is,  as  compared 
with  what  it  became  later,  limited  in  scope  and  contents  —  the  last  edition 
which  left  the  author's  hand  in  1559  had  grown  from  a  work  in  six 
chapters  to  one  in  four  books  and  eighty  chapters  —  yet  its  constructive 
power,  its  critical  force,  its  large  outlook  impress  the  student.  We  have 
here  none  of  Luther's  scholasticism,  or  of  Melanchthon'sdeft  manipulation 
of  incompatible  elements  ;  but  we  have  the  first  thoughts  on  religion  of 
a  mind  trained  by  ancient  literature  to  the  criticism  of  life. 

In  the  second  edition  published  in  1539  his  old  admirations  reassert 
themselves.  Plato  is  there  described  as  of  all  philosophers  '•'  religiosissimus 
et  maxime  sobrius '';  and  Aristotle,  Themistius,  Cicero,  Seneca,  and  other 
classical  writers  are  quoted  in  a  way  that  finds  a  parallel  in  no  theo- 
logical book  of  the  period.  But  in  this  first  edition  he  is  too  much  in 
earnest,  and  writes  too  directly,  to  adorn  his  pages  with  classical  references ; 
though  in  his  style,  in  his  argument,  in  his  deduction  of  all  things  from 
God,  and  in  his  correlation  of  our  knowledge  of  God  and  of  man,  in  his 
emphasis  on  morals,  in  his  sense  for  conduct  and  love  of  freedom,  the 
classical  spirit  is  living  and  active.  Thus,  in  his  ideas  of  Christian  liberty 
we  can  trace  the  student  of  Seneca,  as  in  his  appreciation  of  law  and 
order  we  see  the  Roman  jurist.  He  dislikes  equally  tyranny  and  licence. 
Liberty  is  said  to  consist  in  three  things :  freedom  from  the  law  as  a 
means  of  acceptance  with  God,  the  spontaneous  obedience  of  the  justified 
to  the  Divine  will,  and  freedom  either  to  observe  or  neglect  those  external 
things  which  are  in  themselves  indifferent.    He  specially  insists  on  this 


358  Calvin  at  Geneva  [i5o6 

last ;  since  without  it  there  will  be  no  end  to  superstition  andthe  conscience 
will  enter  a  long  and  inextricable  labyrinth  whence  escape  will  be  difficult. 
The  Church  is  the  elect  people  of  God,  and  must,  if  it  is  to  do  its  work 
in  the  world,  obey  Him.  But  it  can  obey  only  as  it  has  control  over  its 
own  destinies  and  authority  over  its  own  members.  It  will  not  err  in 
matters  of  opinion  if  it  is  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  judges  according 
to  the  Scriptures.  Magistrates  are  ordained  of  God,  and  ought  to  be 
obeyed,  even  though  wicked ;  but  here  a  most  significant  exception  is 
introduced.  God  is  King  of  Kings  ;  when  He  opens  His  mouth,  He 
alone  is  to  be  heard  ;  it  were  worse  than  foolish  to  seek  to  please  men 
by  offending  Him.  We  are  subject  to  our  rulers,  but  only  in  Him ; 
if  they  command  what  He  has  forbidden,  we  must  fear  God  and  disobey 
the  King. 

The  Institutio  bears  the  date  "  Mense  Martio ;  Anno  1536 "  ;  but 
Calvin,  without  waiting  till  his  book  was  on  the  market,  made  a 
hurried  journey  to  Ferrara,  whose  Duchess,  Renee,  a  daughter  of 
Louis  XH,  stood  in  active  sympathy  with  the  Reformers.  The  reasons 
for  this  brief  visit  are  very  obscure  ;  but  it  may  have  been  undertaken  in 
the  hope  of  mitigating  by  the  help  of  Renee  the  severity  of  the 
persecutions  in  France.  On  his  return  Calvin  ventured,  tradition  says, 
to  Noyon,  probably  for  the  sake  of  family  affairs ;  but  he  certainly 
reached  Paris  ;  and,  while  in  the  second  half  of  July  making  his  way  into 
Germany,  he  arrived  at  Geneva.  An  old  friend,  possibly  Louis  du  Tillet, 
discovered  him,  and  told  Farel ;  and  Farel,  in  sore  straits  for  a  helper, 
besought  him,  and  indeed  in  the  name  of  the  Almighty  commanded 
him,  to  stay.  Calvin  was  reluctant,  for  he  was  reserved  and  shy,  and 
conceived  his  vocation  to  be  the  scholar's  rather  than  the  preacher's  ; 
but  the  entreaties  of  Farel,  half  tearful,  half  minatory,  prevailed.  And 
thus  Calvin's  connexion  with  Geneva  began. 

With  the  ancient  and  medieval  history  of  Geneva  we  have  here  no 
concern  ;  it  will  be  enough  if  we  briefly  indicate  those  peculiarities  of 
its  constitution  which  gave  Calvin  his  opportunity,  and  so  much  of  its 
history  as  will  explain  the  condition  in  which  he  found  it. 

Ethnographically  Geneva  was  connected  with  both  the  Teutonic  and 
the  Latin  races  ;  by  language  it  was  French,  by  religious  interests 
and  associations  Italian,  by  political  instincts  and  affinities  Swiss,  by 
commercial  and  industrial  genius  German.  In  the  thirteenth  century  its 
civil  superior  had  been  a  Count  of  Burgundy  ;  in  the  fifteenth  century 
and  early  sixteenth  he  had  been  long  superseded  by  the  Dukes  of  Savoy. 
And  the  supersession  was  inevitable,  for  Geneva  occupied  a  corner  of 
the  Savoyard  country ;  and,  as  an  old  chronicler  has  it,  the  bells  of  the 
city  were  heard  by  more  Savoyards  than  citizens.  Its  constitution,  at 
once  hierarchical,  feudal,  and  democratic,  so  balanced  parties,  whose 
interests  were  seldom  compatible,  as  to  put  a  premium  on  agitation  and 


Political  constitution  of  Geneva  359 

intrigue.  These  parties  were  the  Bishop,  the  Vicedora,  or  civil  over- 
lord, and  the  citizens. 

The  Bishop  v/as  the  sovereign  of  the  city,  elected  originally  by  the 
clergy  and  laity  jointly,  later  by  the  Cathedral  Chapter,  though  customs 
significant  of  the  older  time  continued  to  be  observed.  Thus  the  mere 
vote  of  the  Chapter  did  not  constitute  the  Bishop  lord  of  the  State  ; 
the  election  had  further  to  be  endorsed  by  the  citizens,  who  accompanied 
the  Bishop  in  solemn  procession  to  the  Cathedral,  where  before  the 
altar  and  in  the  presence  of  clergy  and  people  he  swore  on  the  open 
Missal  that  he  would  preserve  their  laws,  their  liberties,  and  their 
privileges.  As  sovereign  he  issued  the  coinage,  imposed  the  customs, 
was  general  of  the  forces,  and  supreme  judge  in  both  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical causes.  In  criminal  cases  he  exercised  the  prerogative  of  mercy, 
and  endorsed  or  remitted  penalties.  The  Cathedral  Chapter  formed  his 
Council  and  represented  him  in  his  absence.  It  constituted  a  permanent 
aristocracy,  and  sat  as  a  sort  of  spiritual  peerage  in  the  city  Council. 
Certain  castles  and  demesnes  were  assigned  to  the  Bishop,  in  order  that 
he  might  be  as  sovereign  in  appearance  and  in  dignity  as  lie  was  in 
law  and  in  fact. 

The  Vicedom  was  captain  of  the  Church,  commissioned  to  repress 
violence  in  the  city  and  to  defend  it  from  external  attacks,  to  act  in  the 
less  important  civil  and  criminal  cases,  and  to  carry  out  the  penalties 
which  the  law  pronounced.  He  was  not  reckoned  a  citizen,  and  stood 
sponsor  for  all  the  foreigners  who  enjoyed  the  hospitality  of  Geneva. 
While  in  theory  the  Bishop's  vassal,  yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact  and  for 
reasons  which  neither  he  nor  the  city  was  allowed  to  forget,  the  office 
had  become  hereditary  in  the  House  of  Savoy ;  but  as  the  Duke  could 
not  himself  reside,  his  duties  were  discharged  by  two  lieutenants,  whose 
functions  were  carefully  defined  and  delimited.  In  a  word,  the  civil 
over-lord  was  the  minister  of  his  ecclesiastical  superior ;  but  the  superior 
tended  to  become  the  puppet  of  the  minister. 

Apart  from  both  stood  the  citizens  in  an  order  of  their  own.  The 
general  Council  of  the  city,  composed  of  the  whole  of  the  citizens,  i.e.  all 
the  heads  of  families,  met  at  the  summons  of  the  great  bell  twice  each 
year  to  transact  business  affecting  the  community  as  such,  to  elect  the 
four  Syndics  and  the  Treasurer,  to  conclude  alliances,  to  proclaim  laws, 
to  fix  the  prices  of  wine  and  of  grain.  The  Syndics  represented  the 
municipal  independence  as  against  the  sovereignty  of  the  Bishop  and 
the  power  of  the  Vicedom.  To  them  the  greater  criminal  jurisdiction 
was  entrusted,  and  they  were  responsible  for  good  order  within  the  city 
from  sunset  to  sunrise.  They  were  assisted  by  the  Smaller  Council, 
composed  of  twenty  qualified  citizens  ;  and  if  any  event  too  responsible 
for  it  to  handle  occurred,  the  Council  of  Sixty  could  be  called,  which 
was  composed  of  the  representatives  of  the  several  districts  and  the 
most  experienced  and  respectable  citizens.     Later,  and  just  before  the 


360  Relations  between  Church  and  State 


Reformation,  the  Council  of  Two  Hundred  was  established  in  order  that 
Geneva  might  be  assimilated  to  the  Swiss  Cantons  whose  help  it 
invoked. 

A  State  so  constituted  and  governed  could  hardly  escape  from  the 
consciousness  that  it  was  a  Church,  or  feel  otherwise  than  as  if  the 
ecclesiastic  at  its  head  made  its  acts  and  legislation  ecclesiastical.  The 
spiritual  offices  were  made  secular  without  the  secular  offices  becoming 
spiritual  ;  in  other  words,  the  clergy  were  assimilated  to  the  laity,  while 
the  laity  did  not  correspond  to  the  clerical  ideal.  The  priests  dressed 
and  armed  like  the  people,  played  and  fought  with  them,  behaved  more 
like  examples  of  worldliness  than  teachers  of  the  Gospel  ;  in  a  word, 
sinned  and  lived  like  citizens  of  Geneva.  The  decay  of  clerical  morals 
was  not  peculiar  to  Geneva,  though  it  must  be  noted  as  a  main  factor 
of  the  situation  there.  Kampschulte,  here  a  reluctant  witness,  declares 
that  the  Bishop  had  become  a  humiliation  to  the  Church  and  a  degra- 
dation to  the  clergy ;  and  he  cites  the  case  of  the  old  priest  who,  when 
ordered  to  put  away  his  mistress,  replied  that  he  was  quite  ready  to 
obey,  provided  all  his  brethren  were  treated  with  the  same  severity.  But 
the  constitution  acted  on  the  collective  even  more  subtly  than  on  the 
personal  consciousness.  The  Council  legislated,  disciplined,  and  excom- 
municated as  if  the  State  were  a  Church,  or,  what  may  be  the  same 
thing,  as  if  there  were  no  Church  in  the  State.  The  extent  to  which 
a  man  could  sin  and  yet  remain  a  citizen  was  a  matter  of  statutory 
regulation :  no  citizen  was  allowed  to  keep  more  than  one  mistress,  and 
every  convicted  adulterer  was  banished.  The  prostitutes  had  a  quarter 
where  they  dwelt,  special  clothing  which  they  wore,  and  a  "queen"  who 
was  responsible  for  the  good  order  of  her  community.  The  clergy  were 
a  kind  of  moral  police,  responsible  for  the  citizens  and  to  the  city ;  and 
so  their  deterioration  meant  a  moral  decline. 

But  a  more  obvious  and,  so  far  as  our  immediate  point  is  concerned, 
a  more  serious  consequence  was  this  :  every  ecclesiastical  question  tended 
to  become  civil,  and  every  civil  question  to  become  ecclesiastical.  A 
constitution  has  a  way  of  working  in  a  fashion  either  better  or  worse 
than,  considered  a  priori^  would  have  seemed  possible  ;  and  this  because 
the  people  are  ever  a  greater  factor  of  harmony  or  disorder  than  the 
laws  they  live  under.  Hence,  so  long  as  Geneva  Avas  inspired  by  one 
spirit,  the  anomalies  of  the  constitution  did  not  breed  discontent ;  but, 
when  new  energies  and  new  ambitions  awoke,  these  anomalies  became 
fruitful  of  disaster  to  the  State.  So  long  as  the  Bishop  and  the  people  had 
common  aims  and  interests,  loyalty  to  both  was  easy  ;  but,  the  moment 
the  interests  of  the  Bishop  looked  in  an  opposite  direction  from  those  of 
the  people,  the  situation  became  difficult.  For  loyalty  to  the  Bishop  as 
head  of  the  State  meant  loyalty  to  the  Church  of  which  he  was  head ; 
but  loyalty  to  the  people  as  the  chief  constituent  of  the  State  became 
disloyalty  to  the  Bishop  as  head  both  of  Church  and  city.     How  this 


Relations  between  the  Bishop  and  Savoy  361 

situation  arose  in  Geneva,  what  it  signified  and  whither  it  tended, 
subsequent  events  will  show. 

The  determining  factors  of  the  situation  were  thus  tAvo,  the  Bishop 
and  the  Duke.  The  Bishop  stood  for  an  ideal  which  he  was  not  always 
either  able  or  willing  to  realise  ;  the  Duke,  who  was  his  vice-lord,  stood 
for  an  interest  whose  strength  grew  with  its  years,  and  created  the 
energy  needed  for  its  own  realisation.  The  function  of  a  Bishop's  Vicar 
did  not  satisfy  the  House  of  Savoy ;  it  wanted  to  be  master  in  its  own 
right,  and  sit  in  Geneva  facing  the  ultramontane  kingdoms,  as  it  sat  in 
Turin  and  faced  the  cismontane  principalities  and  cities.  And  so  began 
the  game  of  intrigue  in  which  the  House  has  always  been  a  skilled 
performer ;  and  the  Bishop  was  played  off  against  the  people,  and  the 
people  against  the  Bishop.  But  it  is  harder  to  capture  a  whole  city 
than  a  single  person;  it  is  easier  to  annex  an  exalted  office  than  to 
control  a  whole  population,  a  multitude  of  impulsive  souls,  singly 
accessible  to  incalculable  yet  imperious  ideas.  So  the  House  concen- 
trated itself  on  the  Bishop  ;  intrigued  with  the  Chapter  which  elected ; 
intrigued  with  Rome  which  approved ;  prevailed  with  both,  and  got  its 
creatures  appointed,  men  who  would  do  its  will  and  forget  their  office 
and  its  duties.  A  chronicler  says  that  "  Duke  and  Bishop,  like  Herod 
and  Pilate,  stood  united  against  the  cit3^"  The  Bishop  he  means  is  the 
Bastard  of  Savoy,  appointed  1513,  a  man  of  notoriously  immoral  conduct, 
and  in  everything  the  unscrupulous  instrument  of  the  ducal  policy.  He 
lived  ignobly,  but  served  his  House  as  best  he  could ;  and  in  a  moment 
of  remorse,  on  his  death-bed  in  1522,  he  admonished  his  successor, 
Pierre  de  la  Baume,  thus :  "  Do  not  when  thou  art  Bishop  of  Geneva 
walk  in  my  footsteps,  but  defend  the  privileges  of  the  Church  and  the 
freedom  of  the  city."  Pierre,  of  course,  promised,  and  for  a  while 
remembered  his  promise,  but  soon  forgot  it,  neglected  Geneva,  alienated 
its  citizens,  lived  isolated  among  them,  absented  himself,  and  allowed 
the  fruit  to  ripen  which  the  House  of  Savoy  hoped  soon  to  pluck 
and  eat. 

This  policy  was  attended  with  mixed  results,  some  of  which  may  be 
described  as  foreseen  and  desired  by  the  ducal  House;  others  as  unforeseen 
and  undesired,  yet  inevitable.  We  may  reckon  in  the  former  class  the 
weakening  of  the  episcopal  authority,  the  isolation  of  the  Bishop,  and 
his  inability  to  stand  alone,  which  meant  his  increased  dependence  on 
the  strong  arm  of  the  Duke  ;  and  in  the  latter  class  the  effect  upon  the 
people  and  the  uprising  of  fit  and  fearless  leaders.  Geneva  might  abut 
upon  Savoyard  territory,  but  its  citizens  were  not  Savoyards,  and  did 
not  intend  to  become  what  they  were  not.  Around  them  was  Swiss 
freedom,  before  them  the  French  soil  and  spirit.  They  breathed  the 
air,  partook  of  the  temper,  lived  by  the  help,  of  both ;  and  they  would 
be  neither  alienated  from  their  kin  nor  cease  to  be  masters  of  their  own 
destinies.     They  were  not  dissatisfied  with  their  Church  nor  with  their 


362  Revolt  against  the  Bishop  and  Savoy         [i530-4 

city  or  its  laws  ;  tliey  knew  what  they  owed  to  the  Bishop,  how  defence- 
less they  would  have  been  without  him,  and  what  immunities  his  presence 
and  influence  had  secured.  But  they  would  not  because  of  past  favours 
submit  to  present  wrongs,  especially  to  the  wrong  which  the  freeborn 
man  most  resents,  the  loss  of  his  freedom.  Hence,  Geneva  read  the 
situation  with  other  eyes  than  the  House  of  Savoy,  and  resolved  not  to 
change  its  religion  but  to  preserve  its  liberty. 

Its  leaders  were  men  like  Philibert  Berthelier,  a  genuine  Genevan, 
self-indulgent,  not  free  from  vice,  but  brave,  prudent,  patriotic,  by  his 
death  helping  to  redeem  the  city  he  loved ;  Bezanson  Hugues,  a  states- 
man, pure  and  high-minded,  incapable  of  meanness  or  cowardice,  a 
devout  Catholic,  yet  a  strenuous  republican,  whose  policy  was  to  check 
the  Savoyard  by  a  Swiss  confederacy  or  a  joint  citizenship  with  Swiss 
allies  ;  Francois  de  Bonivard,  Abbot  of  St  Victor,  a  humanist  with  the 
gift  of  speech  and  of  letters,  a  kind  of  provincial  Erasmus,  with  a 
gi-aphic  pen  and  a  faculty  for  witty  epigram,  yet  with  a  courage  that 
neither  the  fear  nor  the  experience  of  a  prison  could  damp.  The 
patriots  were  known  as  "  Eyguenots^'  confederates,  men  who  had  bound 
themselves  by  an  oath  to  stand  together  and  serve  the  common  cause  ; 
the  Savoyard  party  were  termed  "  Mamelukes  "  because,  as  Bonivard 
tells  us,  "they  surrendered  freedom  and  the  public  weal  that  they  might 
submit  to  tyranny,  as  the  Mamelukes  denied  Christ  that  they  might 
follow  Mohammad." 

The  battle  was  fought  with  splendid  tenacity  ;  the  patriots,  as 
became  loyal  Catholics,  first  tried  to  coerce  the  Bishop  by  appeals  to 
Rome  and  Vienne,  and  failed.  Left  face  to  face  with  Savoy,  they 
appealed  to  their  Swiss  neighbours,  Bern  and  Freiburg,  proposed  to 
them  a  joint  citizenship,  and  long  negotiated  concerning  it  in  vain. 
Bern  hung  back ;  for,  progressive  and  Protestant,  it  did  not  desire  that 
the  defeat  of  the  Duke  should  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  Bishop,  who 
at  last  himself  took  the  decisive  step.  On  August  20,  1530,  Pierre  de 
la  Baurae  proclaimed  the  Genevans  rebels,  and  called  upon  the  Savoyard 
host  to  put  down  the  rebellion,  Bern  and  Freiburg  took  the  field,  and 
the  emancipation  of  Geneva  began.  Yet  it  was  only  a  beginning  ;  the 
ecclesiastical  question  was  involved  in  the  political,  though  the  political 
had  till  now  concealed  the  religious.  But  the  revolt  against  the  Bishop 
could  not  but  become  a  revolt  against  the  Church.  In  other  times  it 
might  have  been  the  reverse,  but  not  now.  Reform  was  in  the  air ;  the 
preachers  had  long  stormed  at  the  gates  of  the  city,  and  they  had 
remained  closed.  But  with  Bern  helping  in  the  front  they  could  be 
kept  fast  no  longer.  They  were  opened,  and  Guillaume  Farel,  fiery 
and  eloquent  in  speech  and  indomitable  in  spirit,  preached  in  his  fearless 
way.  On  February  8,  1534,  the  public  opinion  of  Geneva  pronounced 
for  the  Bernese  joint  citizenship,  and  therefore  for  the  Reformation  ; 
and  thus  ended  the  reign  of  the  Bishop  and  the  chances  of  the  House 


1536-64]  Calvin^ s  spiritual  development  363 

of  Savoy.  On  May  21,  1536,  the  citizens  of  Geneva  swore  that  they 
would  live  according  to  the  holy  Evangelical  law  and  word  of  God  ; 
and  two  months  later  Calvin's  connexion  with  the  city  began. 

Calvin's  life  from  this  point  onwards  falls  into  three  parts  :  his  first 
stay  in  Geneva  from  July,  1536,  to  March,  1538  ;  his  residence  in 
Strassburg  from  September,  1538,  to  September,  1541  ;  and  his  second 
stay  in  Geneva  from  the  last  date  till  his  death.  May  27,  1564,  In  the 
first  period,  he,  in  company  with  Farel,  made  an  attempt  to  organise  the 
Church,  and  reform  the  mind  and  manners  of  Geneva,  and  failed  ;  his 
exile,  formally  voted  by  the  Council,  was  the  penalty  of  his  failure.  In 
the  second  period  he  was  professor  of  theology  and  French  preacher  at 
Strassburg,  a  trusted  divine  and  adviser,  a  delegate  to  the  Protestant 
Churches  of  Germany,  which  he  learned  to  know  better,  making  the 
acquaintance  of  Melanchthon,  and  becoming  more  appreciative  of  Luther. 
At  Strassburg  some  of  his  best  literary  work  was  done  —  his  Letter 
to  Cardinal  Sadoleto  (in  its  way  his  most  perfect  production),  his  Com- 
mentary on  the  Romans,  a  Treatise  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  the  second 
Latin  and  the  first  French  edition  of  his  Institutio.  In  the  third  period 
he  introduced  and  completed  his  legislation  at  Geneva,  taught,  preached, 
and  published  there,  watched  the  Churches  everywhere,  and  conducted 
the  most  extensive  correspondence  of  his  day.  In  these  twenty-eight 
years  he  did  a  work  which  changed  the  face  of  Christendom. 

It  has  been  a  subject  of  perhaps  equal  reproach  among  his  enemies 
and  praise  by  his  friends  that,  as  Beza  says,  Calvin  "  in  doctrine  made 
scarcely  any  change."  For  a  young  man  at  twenty-six  to  reach  his  final 
conclusions  in  the  realms  of  thought  and  belief,  especially  after  a  radical 
revolution  of  mind,  would  be  matter  of  congratulation  for  his  enemies 
rather  than  for  his  admirers.  But  the  judgment  rests  on  a  double  mistake, 
biographical  and  historical.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  few  men  may  have 
changed  less  ;  but  few  also  have  developed  more.  Every  crisis  in  his 
career  taught  him  something,  and  so  enhanced  his  capacity.  His  studies 
of  Stoicism  showed  him  the  value  of  morals  ;  and  he  learned  how  to 
emphasise  the  sterner  ethical  qualities  as  well  as  the  humaner,  and  the  more 
clementby  thesideof  thehigher,  public  virtues.  His  early  humanism  made 
him  a  scholar  and  an  exegete,  a  master  of  elegant  Latinity,  of  lucid  and 
incisive  speech,  of  a  graphic  pen  and  historical  imagination.  His  juristic 
studies  gave  him  an  idea  of  law,  through  which  he  interpreted  the  more 
abstract  notions  of  theology,  and  a  love  of  order,  which  compelled  him 
to  organise  his  Church.  His  imagination,  playing  upon  the  primitive 
Christian  literature,  helped  him  to  see  the  religion  Jesus  instituted  as 
Jesus  Himself  saw  it  ;  while  the  forces  visible  around  him  —  the  super- 
stitions, the  regnant  and  unreproved  vices,  the  people  so  quickl}^  sinning 
and  so  easily  forgiven,  the  relics  so  innumerable  and  so  fictitious,  the 
acts  and  articles  of  worship,  and  especially  the  Sacraments  deified  and 


364  Calvin  as  a  legislator  [1536-64 

turned  into  substitutes  for  Deity  —  induced  him  to  judge  the  system  that 
claimed  to  be  the  sole  interpreter  and  representative  of  Christ  as  a  crafty 
compound  of  falsehood  and  truth. 

His  knowledge  that  the  system  had  profited  by  men  like  Erasmus, 
whose  wit  made  havoc  of  clerical  sins  and  monkish  superstition  and 
Romish  errors,  and  who  yet  conformed,  or  men  like  Gerard  Roussel,  who 
preached  what  he  himself  and  they  thought  the  Gospel,  and  who  yet  con- 
sented to  hold  office  in  the  Catholic  Church,  —  begat  in  him  the  belief  that 
only  by  separation  and  negation  could  Reformation  be  accomplished .  His 
friendship  with  the  good  and  simple,  those  who  had  tried  to  realise  the 
religion  of  Jesus,  and  his  knowledge  of  the  tyrannies,  the  miseries,  and 
the  martyrdoms  which  they  had  in  consequence  endured,  persuaded  him 
that  his  duty  as  an  honest  man  was  to  side  with  the  oppressed  whom  he 
admired  against  the  oppressors  whose  ways  and  policy  he  detested.  His 
experiences  as  a  teacher  and  preacher  of  the  new  faith,  especially  at 
Geneva,  where  he  tells  us  he  found  at  his  first  coming  preachings  and 
tumults,  breaking  and  burning  of  images,  but  no  Reformation,  showed 
him  that  individual  men  and  even  a  whole  society  might  profess  the 
Reformed  faith  without  being  reformed  in  character.  Out  of  these  ex- 
periences came  his  master  problem,  namely,  by  what  means  could  we  best 
secure  the  expression  of  a  changed  faith  in  a  changed  life  ?  Or,  in  other 
words,  how  could  the  Church  be  made  not  simply  an  institution  for  the 
worship  of  God,  but  an  agency  for  the  making  of  men  fit  to  worship  Him  ? 

His  attempt  to  solve  this  problem  constitutes  his  chief  title  to  a 
place  in  the  history  of  religion  and  civilisation.  It  means  that  Calvin 
was  greater  as  a  legislator  than  as  a  theologian,  that  we  have  less  cause 
to  be  grateful  to  him  for  the  system  called  Calvinism  than  for  the 
Church  that  he  organised.  In  other  words,  his  polity  is  a  more  perfect 
expression  of  the  man  than  his  theology,  though  his  theology  was  the 
point  where  he  was  most  vulnerable,  and  where  therefore  he  was  most 
fiercely,  not  to  say  ferociously,  attacked.  The  foes  born  in  his  own 
household,  men  like  Castellio  or  Bolsec,  took  the  Divine  decrees  as  the 
spot  where  they  could  strike  most  fatall}^  at  him  and  his  pre-eminence. 
The  Jesuits  developed  their  doctrine  in  explicit  antithesis  to  his  ;  and 
the  Lutherans,  when  they  wished  to  discredit  his  views  on  the  Lord's 
Supper,  thought  they  could  do  it  most  effectually  by  criticising  the 
absolute  Predestination.  The  sects  that  rose  within  the  Reformed 
Church,  such  as  the  Socinian  and  the  Remonstrant,  justified  their  schism 
as  a  protest  against  views  which  they  described  as  equally  dishonouring 
to  God  and  belittling  to  man.  But  though  Calvin's  theology  occasioned 
the  hottest  and  bitterest  controversies  known  to  Christian  history,  yet  it 
is  here  that  his  mind  is  least  original  and  his  ideas  are  most  clearly 
derivative.  Without  Augustine  we  should  never  have  had  Calvinism, 
which  is  but  the  principles  of  the  anti-Pelagian  treatises  developed, 
systematised,  and  applied. 


Calvin'' s  relation  to  Augustine  365 

There  are  indeed  two  points  of  difference  between  them  ;  Augustine 
disguised  his  positions  in  a  criticism  of  hated  and  feared  sectaries  ;  but 
Calvin  stated  Jiis  in  their  severe  and  colossal  nakedness  as  the  sole  truth 
which  Scripture  had  revealed  to  men.  Yet  Augustine  affirms  and 
argues  his  doctrines  with  a  breadth  and  a  positive  harshness  which  we 
do  not  find  in  Calvin  ;  on  the  contrary,  there  is  evidence  that  while  the 
system  held  and  awed  Calvin's  reason  it  yet  did  not  win  his  heart. 
That  it  was  taught  by  the  greatest  Father  of  the  Church  was  a  reason  that 
appealed  to  him  as  a  scholar  ;  that  this  Father  found  it  in  Paul  was  a 
more  cogent  reason  still,  for  thus  it  appealed  to  him  as  a  thinker  whose 
ultimate  authority  was  the  Word  of  God.  And  on  this  point  vre  have 
incidental  evidence.  In  August,  1539,  Calvin  wrote  the  Preface  to  the 
second  edition  of  his  Institution  where  the  doctrines  of  Grace  and  Sin 
occupy  for  the  first  time  their  determinative  position  in  his  system  ;  and 
in  October  of  the  same  year  he  published  his  Commentary  on  Romans. 
It  seems,  therefore,  as  if  the  greater  prominence  that  he  now  gave  to  the 
doctrines,  which  we  have  come  to  think  most  characteristic  of  him,  was 
due  to  his  closer  study  of  Paul  as  interpreted  by  Augustine.  And  this 
system » helped  him  to  do  two  things  :  to  explain  his  own  as  a  normal 
human  experience,  and  to  face  undismayed  the  strength  and  the  terrors 
of  an  infallible  Church.  These  two  positions  are  affirmed  and  co- 
ordinated in  a  splendid  passage  in  the  Letter  to  Sadoleto,  published  also 
in  1539,  in  September,  just  between  the  Institutio  and  the  Commentary, 
which  tells  of  his  vocation  by  God,  and  of  his  consequent  right  to  speak 
in  the  name  of  Him  who  had  put  His  word  in  his  mouth  and  written 
His  law  upon  his  conscience.  God  had  called  him,  and  laid  upon  him  a 
duty  which  he  could  not  evade  without  defying  God. 

But  here  emerges  another  point  of  distinction  from  Augustine : 
Calvin  conceived  that  God  spoke  to  him  directly,  without  any  inter- 
mediate person  or  institution.  Augustine's  theology  was  absolute,  but 
his  theory  of  the  Church  was  conditional,  and  thus  the  one  qualified  the 
other :  the  God  whom  the  thinker  conceived  was  modified  by  the  God 
of  whom  the  priest  was  the  representative  and  mouthpiece.  It  is  the 
essence  of  the  priestly  idea  to  manipulate  and  administer  the  conditions 
on  which  God  finds  access  to  men,  and  men  gain  access  to  God .  Hence, 
so  long  as  Augustine's  theology  was  embedded  in  a  sacerdotal  system, 
the  system  softened  the  theology  ;  the  thought  was  accommodated  to  the 
institution,  the  institution  w^as  not  subdued  to  the  likeness  of  the  thought. 
But  Calvin  rejected  the  Church  of  Augustine,  and  took  over  his  later 
intellectual  system  in  all  its  naked  severity.  The  sin  of  man  confronted 
the  grace  of  God  ;  man,  sinful  by  nature,  could  do  no  right  :  God, 
infinite  in  majesty  and  in  holiness,  could  do  no  wrong.  Man  was  born 
in  sin  ;  his  nature  was  corrupt,  and  as  his  nature  was  his  actions  must 
be.  If  then  he  was  to  be  saved,  God  must  save  him  ;  and,  as  God's  will 
was  gracious,  saving  was  as  natural  to  Him  as  sinning  was  to  man. 


366  Influence  of  his  theology  on  his  legislation 

Hence,  we  could  contribute  nothing  towards  our  own  salvation ;  God  did 
it  all  ;  we  had  no  merit,  and  He  had  all  the  glory.  In  a  system  so 
conceived  there  was  no  room  for  the  priest ;  his  prayers  and  sacrifices, 
his  masses  and  absolutions,  his  shrines  and  relics  and  articles  of  worship, 
were  but  the  impertinences  of  ephemeral  and  feeble  man  in  the  face  of 
the  Eternal  Potency. 

Calvin  knew  well  the  sublimity  of  the  system  which  he  expounded, 
but  he  could  have  wished  it  to  be  more  pitiful.  He  did  not  love  to 
think  of  the  innumerable  millions  of  the  heathen  with  their  infant 
children  ordained  to  everlasting  death  ;  the  decree  that  fixed  the  number 
alike  of  the  saved  and  the  lost  was  to  him  an  awful  decree,  but  he  could 
not  look  towards  the  Alps  without  feeling  how  closely  the  sublime  and 
the  awful  were  allied.  And  if  the  sublimity  of  earth  was  terrible,  how 
much  more  terrible  must  be  the  majesty  of  God  !  But  if  He  is  so 
august,  must  we  not  labour  to  attain  the  dignity  of  moral  manhood,  the 
only  dignity  which  it  becomes  Him  to  recognise  ? 

We  come  then  to  Calvin's  legislative  achievements  as  his  main  title  to 
name  and  fame.  But  two  points  must  here  be  noted.  In  the  first  place, 
while  his  theology  was  less  original  and  effective  than  his  legislation  or 
polity,  yet  he  so  construed  the  former  as  to  make  the  latter  its  logical 
and  indeed  inevitable  outcome.  The  polity  was  a  deduction  from  the 
theology,  which  may  be  defined  as  a  science  of  the  Divine  will  as  a  moral 
will,  aiming  at  the  complete  moralisation  of  Man,  whether  as  a  unit  or 
as  a  societ3^  The  two  were  thus  so  organically  connected  that  each  lent 
strength  to  the  other,  the  system  to  the  Church  and  the  Church  to  the 
system,  while  otlier  and  more  potently  reasonable  theologies  either  died 
or  lived  a  feeble  and  struggling  life.  Secondly,  the  legislation  was  made 
possible  and  practicable  by  Geneva,  probably  the  only  place  in  Europe 
where  it  could  have  been  enacted  and  enforced.  We  have  learned 
enough  concerning  Genevan  history  and  institutions  to  understand  why 
this  should  have  been  the  case.  The  city  was  small,  free,  homogeneous, 
distinguished  by  a  strong  local  patriotism,  a  stalwart  communal  life. 
In  obedience  to  these  instincts  it  had  just  emancipated  itself  from  the 
ecclesiastical  Prince  and  its  ancient  religious  system ;  and  the  change 
thus  accomplished  was,  though  disguised  in  a  religious  habit,  yet 
essentially  political.  For  the  Council  which  abolished  the  Bishop  had 
made  itself  heir  to  his  faculties  and  functions ;  it  could  only  dismiss 
liim  as  civil  lord  by  dismissing  him  as  the  ecclesiastical  head  of  Geneva, 
and  in  so  doing  it  assumed  the  right  to  succeed  as  well  as  to  supersede 
him  in  both  capacities.  This,  however,  involved  a  notable  inversion  of 
old  ideas  ;  before  the  change  the  ecclesiastical  authority  had  been  civil, 
but  because  of  the  change  the  civil  authority  became  ecclesiastical.  If 
theocracy  means  the  rule  of  the  Ch\irch  or  the  sovereignty  of  the  clergy 
in  the  State,  then  the  ancient  constitution  of  Geneva  was  theocratic ;  if 
democracy  means  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  in  Church  as  well  as  in 


1536-8]  Calvin's  first  rule  at  Geneva  367 

State,  then  the  change  had  made  it  democratic.  And  it  was  just  after 
the  change  had  been  effected  that  Calvin's  connexion  with  the  city 
began. 

Its  chief  pastor  had  persuaded  him  to  stay  as  a  colleague,  and  the 
Council  appointed  him  professor  and  preacher.  He  was  young,  exactly 
twenty-seven  years  of  age,  full  of  high  ideals,  but  inexperienced,  un- 
acquainted, with  men,  without  any  knowledge  of  Geneva  and  the  state 
of  things  there.  He  could  therefore  make  no  terms,  could  only  stay 
to  do  his  duty.  What  that  duty  was  soon  became  apparent.  Geneva 
had  not  become  any  more  moral  in  character  because  it  had  changed 
its  mind  in  religion.  It  had  two  months  before  Calvin's  arrival  sworn 
to  live  according  to  the  holy  evangelical  law  and  Word  of  God  ;  but 
it  did  not  seem  to  understand  its  own  oath.  And  the  man  whom  his 
intellectual  sincerity  and  moral  integrity  had  driven  out  of  Catholicism, 
could  not  hold  office  in  any  Church  which  made  light  of  conviction  and 
conduct ;  and  so  he  at  once  set  himself  to  organise  a  Church  that  should 
be  efficaciously  moral.  He  built  on  the  ancient  Genevan  idea,  tliat  the 
city  is  a  Church  ;  only  he  wished  to  make  the  Church  to  be  primary  and 
real.  The  theocracy,  which  had  been  construed  as  the  reign  of  the  clergy, 
he  would  interpret  as  ideal  and  realise  as  a  reign  of  God.  The  citizens, 
who  had  assumed  control  of  their  own  spiritual  destinies  and  ecclesiastical 
affairs,  he  wanted  to  instruct  in  their  responsibilities  and  discipline  into 
obedience.  And  he  would  do  it  in  the  way  of  a  jurist  who  believes  in 
the  harmony  of  law  and  custom  ;  he  would  by  positive  enactments  train 
the  city,  which  conceived  itself  to  be  a  Church,  to  be  and  behave  as  if 
it  were  indeed  a  Church,  living  according  to  the  Gospel  which  it  had 
sworn  to  obey. 

Thus  a  confession  of  faith  was  drawn  up  which  the  people  were 
to  adopt  as  their  own,  and  so  attain  clarity  and  concordance  of  mind 
concerning  God  and  His  Word  ;  and  a  catechism  was  composed  which 
was  to  be  made  the  basis  of  religious  instruction  in  both  the  school  and 
the  family,  for  the  citizen  as  well  as  the  child.  Worship  was  to  be 
carefully  regulated,  psalm-books  prepared,  psalm -singing  cultivated  ; 
the  preacher  was  to  interpret  the  Word,  and  the  pastor  to  supervise 
the  flock.  The  Lord's  Supper  was  to  be  celebrated  monthly,  but  only 
those  who  were  morally  fit  or  worthy  were  to  be  allowed  to  communicate.- 
The  Church,  in  order  that  it  might  fulfil  its  functions  and  guard  the  Holy 
Table,  must  have  the  right  of  excommunication.  It  was  not  enough  that 
a  man  should  be  a  citizen  or  a  councillor  to  be  admitted  to  the  Lord's 
Supper;  his  mind  must  be  Christian,  and  his  conduct  Christ-like. 
Without  faith  the  rite  was  profaned,  the  presence  of  Christ  was  not 
realised.  Moreover,  since  matrimonial  cases  were  many  and  infelicity 
sprang  both  from  differences  of  faith  and  impurity  of  conduct,  a  board, 
composed  partly  of  magistrates  and  partly  of  ministers,  was  to  be 
appointed  to  deal  with  them  ;  and  it  was  to  have  the  power  to  exclude 


368  Expulsion  and  return  of  Calvin  [i538-4i 

from  the  Church  those  who  either  did  not  believe  its  doctrines  or  did 
not  obey  its  commandments. 

These  were  drastic  proposals  to  be  made  to  a  city  which  had  just 
dismissed  its  Bishop,  attained  political  freedom,  and  proclaimed  a 
Reformation  of  religion  ;  and  Calvin  was  not  the  man  to  leave  them 
inoperative.  A  card-player  was  pilloried  ;  a  tire-woman,  a  mother,  and 
two  bridesmaids  were  arrested  because  they  had  adorned  the  bride  too 
gaily  ;  an  adulterer  was  driven  with  the  partner  of  his  guilt  through  the 
streets  by  the  common  hangman,  and  then  banished.  These  things 
taxed  the  temper  of  the  city  sorely  ;  it  was  not  unfamiliar  with  legisla- 
tion of  the  kind,  but  it  had  not  been  accustomed  to  see  it  enforced. 
Kence,  men  who  came  to  be  known  as  "  libertines,"  though  they  were 
both  patriotic  and  moral  and  only  craved  freedom,  rose  and  said, 
"  This  is  an  intolerable  tyranny  ;  we  will  not  allow  any  man  to  be  lord 
over  our  consciences."  And  about  the  same  time  Calvin's  orthodoxy  was 
challenged.  Two  Anabaptists  arrived  and  demanded  liberty  to  prophesy  ; 
and  Peter  Caroli  charged  him  with  heresy  as  to  the  Trinity.  He  would 
not  use  the  Athanasian  Creed  ;  and  he  defended  himself  by  reasons  that 
the  scliolar  who  knows  its  history  will  respect.  The  end  soon  came. 
When  he  heard  that  he  had  been  sentenced  to  banishment,  he  said,  "If 
I  had  served  men  this  would  have  been  a  poor  reward,  but  I  have  served 
Him  who  never  fails  to  perform  what  He  has  promised." 

In  1541  Geneva  recalled  Calvin,  and  he  obeyed  as  one  who  goes  to 
fulfil  an  imperative  but  unwelcome  duty.  There  is  nothing  more 
pathetic  in  the  literature  of  the  period  than  his  hesitancies  and  fears. 
He  tells  Farel  that  he  would  rather  die  a  hundred  times  than  again  take 
up  that  cross  "  in  qua  millies  quotidie pereundum  esset.''  And  he  writes  to 
Viret  that  it  were  better  to  perish  once  for  all  than  "  in  ilia  carnificina 
iterum  torqueri.^'  But  beloved  Geneva,  and  it  was  in  evil  case.  Rome 
was  plotting  to  reclaim  it  ;  Savoy  was  watching  her  opportunity,  the 
patriots  feared  to  go  forward,  and  even  the  timid  dared  not  go  back.  So 
tlie  necessities  of  the  city,  divided  between  its  factions  and  its  foes,  con- 
stituted an  appeal  which  Calvin  could  not  resist  ;  but  he  did  not  yield 
unconditionally.  He  went  back  as  the  legislator  who  was  to  frame  laws 
for  its  Church  ;  and  he  so  adapted  them  to  the  civil  constitution  and  the 
constitution  to  them,  that  he  raised  the  little  city  of  Geneva  to  be  the 
Protestant  Rome. 

Calvin's  idea,  whether  of  the  Church  or  the  State,  it  is  neither 
possible  nor  necessary  to  discuss  fully  here  ;  as  he  conceived.  Fatherhood 
belonged  to  God,  motherhood  to  the  Church  :  we  entered  into  life  by 
being  conceived  in  her  womb  and  suckled  at  her  breasts,  and  so  long 
as  we  lived  we  were  as  scholars  in  her  school.  She  was  catholic,  holy, 
one  and  indivisible ;  to  invent  another  Church  would  be  to  divide  Christ. 
In  this  sense  she  comprehended  all  the  people  of  God,  His  elect  in  every 


The  Church  and  the  Churches  369 

age  and  place ;  but  this  eternal  and  internal  Church  was,  as  it  were, 
distributed  into  local  and  external  Churches,  which  existed  in  the  towns 
and  villages  inhabited  of  men.  Calvin  held,  indeed,  that  the  local  ought 
to  possess  the  same  spiritual  qualities  as  the  universal  Church  ;  but  he 
did  not  hold  the  two  to  be  identical.  They  differed  in  many  ways  ;  in 
the  one  case  the  chosen  of  God  constituted  the  Church,  but  in  the  other 
case,  as  Augustine  had  said,  "there  are  very  many  sheep  without, 
and  very  many  wolves  within."  The  universal  Church  lived  under  the 
immediate  sovereignty  of  God  ;  but  particular  Churches,  while  bound  so 
to  live,  yet  were  organised  according  to  the  wants  of  human  society,  and 
so  long  as  the  people  were  God's  and  lived  unto  Him,  their  society  was 
a  Church,  which,  as  an  inhabitant  of  space  and  time,  could  not  but  live 
its  corporate  life  in  some  State,  in  relation  to  it  even  while  differing 
from  it.  What  this  relation  ought  to  be  Calvin  rather  implied  than 
discussed.  He  assumed  their  distinctness,  but  his  policy  often  involved 
their  identity.  It  would  be  approximately  true  to  say  that  the  ideal  Church 
was  independent  of  the  State,  above  it  while  distributed  through  it ; 
but  the  actual  Church,  while  owing  its  existence  to  the  ideal,  was  yet 
associated  with  the  State,  and  often  bound  to  act  with  it  and  through 
it.  It  was  not  possible  that  a  local  Church  should  be  merged  in  the 
State,  for  then  it  would  cease  to  be  a  Divine  institution ;  or  be  subor- 
dinate to  the  State,  for  then  it  would  be  a  mere  minister  of  man's 
wall,  subject  to  all  the  accidents  and  influences  proper  to  time  ;  or  be 
separated  from  the  State,  for  then  it  would  be  cut  off  from  the  field 
which  most  needed  its  presence  and  action. 

Hence  the  proper  analogy  was  natural  rather  than  political :  —  as 
soul  and  body  constituted  one  man,  so  Church  and  State  constituted 
one  society,  distinct  in  function  but  inseparable  in  being.  Without  the 
State  there  would  be  no  medium  for  the  Church  to  work  in,  no  body  for 
the  soul  to  animate ;  without  the  Church  there  would  be  no  law  higher 
than  expediency  to  govern  the  State,  no  ideal  of  thought  and  conduct, 
no  soul  to  animate  the  body.  Both  Church  and  State  therefore  were 
necessary  to  the  good  ordering  of  society,  and  each  was  explained  by  the 
same  idea.  All  human  authority  was  the  creation  of  God  ;  His  will  had 
formed  the  State  to  care  for  the  actual  man,  who  was  temporal,  and  the 
Church  to  care  for  the  ideal  man,  who  was  immortal.  Each  had  the 
same  cause  or  root ;  and,  without  both,  life  could  not  be  so  ordered  as 
to  realise  Eternal  Will.  Over  the  State  God  placed  the  magistrate, 
who  might  here  be  a  monarch,  an  Emperor  or  King,  and  there  a  Syndic 
or  Council,  created  by  the  people  for  the  people  ;  but  whatever  he  might 
be,  he  was  yet  a  power  ordained  of  God  for  the  good  of  man  and  the 
regulation  of  society.  In,  rather  than  over,  the  Church  God  had  set 
a  ministry  or  authorities  that  were  to  rule  by  the  teaching  which  con- 
vinced the  reason  and  commanded  the  conscience,  and  by  the  service 
which  won  the  heart  and   persuaded   the   will.     The  ministers  were 

C.    M.    H.    II.  24 


370  TJce  Ordonnances  Ecclesiastiques 

responsible  to  the  State  in  all  civil  matters ;  but  the  magistrates  were 
responsible  to  the  Church  in  all  religious  concerns,  especially  those 
affecting  faith  and  conduct.  The  laws  of  the  State  were  civil  in  form, 
but  religious  in  origin ;  the  laws  of  the  Church  were  civil  in  sanction, 
though  spiritual  in  scope  and  purpose.  Calvin  indeed  had,  as  regards 
civil  polity,  distinguished  between  monarchy,  aristocracy,  and  democracy, 
and  had  indicated  their  respective  excellences  and  defects,  as  well  as  his 
own  personal  preferences  ;  but  he  declined  to  assert  that  one  of  them 
was  absolutely  or  under  all  conditions  the  best.  He  could  not  feel  as  if 
a  similar  latitude  of  judgment  were  allowed  him  as  regards  the  Church, 
where  man  was  not  free  to  follow  any  order  he  liked,  for  in  the  New 
Testament  a  polity  was  given  him  to  imitate.  Our  Lord  had  Himself 
shown  how  His  Church  ought  to  be  governed,  and  where  He  had  spoken 
man's  duty  was  to  interpret  His  word  and  do  His  will. 

The  Ordonnances  Ecclesiastiques  may  be  described  as  Calvin's 
programme  of  Genevan  reform,  or  his  method  for  applying  to  the  local 
and  external  Church  the  government  which  our  Lord  had  instituted  and 
the  Apostles  had  realised.  These  Ordinances  expressed  his  historical 
sense  and  gratified  his  religious  temper,  while  adapting  the  Church  to 
the  city,  so  that  the  city  might  become  a  better  Church.  To  explain  in 
detail  how  he  proposed  to  do  this  is  impossible  within  our  limits ;  and 
we  shall  thei'efore  confine  ourselves  to  the  most  important  of  the  factors 
he  created,  the  Ministry  and  the  Consistory. 

The  Reformed  ministry  had  till  now  been  largely  the  creation  of 
conversion,  or  inspiration,  or  chance,  and  the  result  could  not  be  termed 
satisfactory.  Convinced  men  had  found  their  way  into  it,  and  had  created 
a  conviction  as  sincere  and  an  enthusiasm  as  vehement  as  their  own ;  but 
along  with  them  had  also  come  hosts  of  restless  men,  moved  by  superficial 
and  often  ignoble  causes  :  —  discontent,  petulance,  discomfort,  the  desire 
to  legitimise  illegitimate  connexions,  dislike  to  authority,  and  the  mere 
love  of  change.  And  they  had  proved  most  mischievous  forces  in  the 
Protestant  Churches,  had  continued  restless,  become  seditious,  im- 
practicable, schismatic,  authors  of  disorder  and  enemies  of  peace,  who 
arrested  progress  and  made  men  ashamed  of  change.  Calvin  had  had 
his  own  experience  of  these  men  ;  and  he,  as  a  man  of  grave  and  juristic 
mind,  had  found  the  experience  disagreeable,  and  was  to  find  it  more 
disagreeable  still.  With  the  insight  of  genius  he  perceived  that  the 
battle  could  be  won,  not  by  chance  recruits,  but  only  by  a  disciplined 
army ;  and,  in  order  that  the  army  might  be  created,  he  invented  the 
discipline.  The  Ordinances  may  indeed  be  termed  a  method  for  making 
and  guiding  a  Reformed  ministry,  a  clergy  that,  without  any  priestly 
character,  should  yet  be  more  efficient  than  the  ancient  priesthood. 
Hence  where  the  Roman  placed  the  Church,  Calvin  set  the  Deity,  and 
made  a  man's  right  to  enter  the  ministerial  office  depend  on  his  vocation 


The  Reformed  ministry  371 

by  God.  But  this  belief  in  a  Divine  choice  and  call  was  to  be  tested  by 
a  threefold  process.  Examination,  Election,  Institution  or  Introduction. 
The  Examination,  which  was  to  be  conducted  by  men  already  in  the 
rainistrj',  the  recognised  preachers  and  teachers  of  the  Church,  covered 
the  whole  period  of  thought  and  life  ;  what  the  candidate  had  learned 
at  school  and  college,  what  he  had  been  at  home  and  in  societ}^  what 
evidence  he  could  furnish  as  to  his  call  being  of  God.  He  had  to  show 
what  and  why  he  believed  ;  the  relation  in  which  his  beliefs  stood  to  the 
Church  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Scriptures  on  the  other  ;  whether  he 
could  teach  what  he  had  learned,  or  preach  as  he  believed ;  how  he  had 
hitherto  lived,  and  whether  he  had  so  behaved  himself  as  to  be  without 
reproach.  If  the  candidate  satisfied  the  ministerial  examiners,  they 
presented  him  to  the  Council  ;  if  the  Council  approved,  he  preached 
before  the  people  ;  and  if  they  approved,  he  was  declared  to  be  elected 
a  minister  of  the  Word.  Institution,  which  was  as  much  a  civil  as  a 
religious  process,  followed,  and  it  ended  with  the  candidate  taking  an 
oath  before  the  Council  that  he  would  edify  the  Church,  serve  the  city, 
and  set  to  all  a  goodly  example  of  obedience. 

But  these  initial  steps  were  not  the  most  essential  parts  of  the  disci- 
pline ;  more  effectual  still  were  the  means  employed  to  secure  the  minister's 
efficiency,  and  to  define  his  relation  to  the  city  or  Church.  The  conduct 
of  each  person  was  the  concern  of  the  ministerial  body  as  a  whole  ;  and 
the  behaviour  of  the  body  was  open  to  the  criticism  of  every  minister. 
The  humblest  pastor  had  the  right,  which  was  laid  upon  him  as  a  duty, 
to  criticise  the  bearing  or  the  action  of  the  most  eminent ;  and  responsi- 
bility was  so  personal  and  yet  so  collective,  at  once  so  concentrated  and 
so  distributed,  that  while  it  belonged  to  all,  each  individual  was  made  to 
feel  as  if  he  alone  bore  it.  Thus  in  Geneva  the  ministers  formed  the 
Venerable  Company,  correspondent  to  the  Smaller  Council,  which  was,  as 
it  were,  the  cabinet  or  executive  of  the  Greater  ;  and  every  week  it  met 
in  Congregation,  as  it  was  called,  to  study  the  Scriptures,  discuss  doc- 
trine, and  review  conduct.  There  was,  besides,  every  three  months  a 
special  Synod  which  made  inquisition  into  the  faults  and  failures  of 
the  brotherhood,  and  was  charged  with  the  discipline  of  the  faithless. 
Alongside  of  these  faculties  ran  duties  which  were  coextensive  with  the 
religious  wants  of  the  city.  The  minister  of  the  Word  was  a  preacher 
who  had  to  speak  to  the  people  concerning  the  truth  and  will  of  God  ; 
a  pastor  of  the  flock  which  was  given  him  to  supervise  and  tend  ;  a 
guide  of  the  worship  which  he  was  bound  to  make  worthy  of  God 
and  uplifting  to  man  ;  an  administrator  of  the  Sacraments  which  sealed 
the  covenants  and  spoke  to  faith  of  God's  saving  grace  and  the  presence 
of  His  Son  ;  an  instructor  with  the  duty  of  catechising  old  and  young 
and  directing  education  ;  a  friend  to  every  man  who  needed  him,  with  a 
special  mission  to  the  poor,  especially  in  seasons  of  disease  and  distress, 
while  also  the  soul  of  all  the  charity  in  the  city. 


372  System  of  education 


Nor,  though  the  ministers  were  to  hold  so  influential  a  place  in  the 
body  politic,  could  they  come  to  feel  as  if  they  were  a  self -propagating, 
an  exclusive,  or  a  sacrosanct  corporation.  Without  the  ministry  the 
minister  could  not  be  made  ;  but  without  the  people  he  could  not  be 
called  or  maintained.  He  issued  from  the  ranks  of  the  citizens,  and  he 
could  be  reduced  to  their  condition  again.  If  his  conduct  was  scanda-- 
lous,  or  if  his  faith  changed  or  failed,  the  reduction  was  inevitable.  He 
was  responsible  to  the  Church,  typified  by  its  clergy  ;  and  responsible  for 
the  Church,  typified  by  the  city  or  the  laity.  Calvin's  theory  was  a  theo- 
cracy, not  a  hierocracy  ;  the  clergy  did  not  reign,  nor  did  the  organised 
Church  govern  ;  but  God  reigned  over  Church  and  State  alike,  and  so 
governed  that  both  magistrates  and  clergy  were  His  ministers.  In 
Geneva  every  office  was  sacred,  and  existed  for  the  glory  of  the  God 
who  was  its  Creator. 

The  ministerial  ideal  embodied  in  these  Ecclesiastical  Ordinances 
may  be  said  to  have  had  certain  indirect  but  international  results  ;  it 
compelled  Calvin  to  develop  his  system  of  education  ;  it  supplied  the 
Reformed  Church,  especially  in  France,  with  the  men  which  it  needed 
to  fight  its  battles  and  to  form  the  iron  in  its  blood  ;  it  presented  the 
Reformed  Church  everywhere  with  an  intellectual  and  educational  ideal 
which  must  be  realised  if  its  work  was  to  be  done  ;  and  it  created  the 
modern  preacher,  defining  the  sphere  of  his  activity  and  setting  up  for 
his  imitation  a  noble  and  lofty  example. 

Calvin  soon  found  that  the  Reformed  faith  could  live  in  a  democratic 
city  only  by  an  enlightened  pulpit  speaking  to  enlightened  citizens,  and 
that  an  educated  ministry  was  helpless  without  an  educated  people. 
His  method  for  creating  both  entitles  him  to  rank  among  the  foremost 
makers  of  modern  education.  As  a  humanist  he  believed  in  the  classical 
languages  and  literatures  —  there  is  a  tradition  which  says  that  he  read 
through  Cicero  once  a  year  —  and  so  "he  built  his  system  on  the  solid 
rock  of  Graeco-Roman  antiquity."  Yet  he  did  not  neglect  religion  ;  he 
so  trained  the  boys  of  Geneva  through  his  Catechism  that  each  was  said 
to  be  able  to  give  a  reason  for  his  faith  "  like  a  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne." 
He  believed  in  the  unity  of  knowledge  and  the  community  of  learning, 
placing  the  magistrate  and  the  minister,  the  citizen  and  the  pastor,  in 
the  hands  of  the  same  teacher,  and  binding  the  school  and  the  university 
together.  The  boy  learned  in  the  one  and  the  man  studied  in  the  other  ; 
but  the  school  was  the  way  to  the  university,  the  university  was  the 
goal  of  the  school.  In  nothing  does  the  paedagogic  genius  of  Calvin 
more  appear  than  in  his  fine  jealousy  as  to  the  character  and  com- 
petence whether  of  masters  or  professors,  and  in  his  unwearied  quest 
after  qualified  men.  His  letters  teem  with  references  to  the  men  in 
various  lands  and  many  universities  whom  he  was  seeking  to  bring  to 
Geneva.  The  first  Rector,  Antoine  Saunier,  was  a  notable  man  ;  and  he 
never  rested  till  he  had  secured  his  dear  old  teacher,  Mathurin  Cordier. 


1541-64]  Calvhi's  influence  in  France  373 

Castellio  was  a  schoolmaster  ;  Theodore  Beza  was  head  of  College  and 
Academy,  or  school  and  university,  together ;  and  Calvin  himself  was  a  pro- 
fessor of  theology.  The  success  of  the  College  was  great ;  the  success  of  the 
Academy  was  greater.  Men  came  from  all  quarters  —  English,  Italians, 
Spanish,  Germans,  Russians,  ministers,  jurists,  old  men,  young  men,  all 
with  the  passion  to  learn  in  their  blood  —  to  jostle  each  other  among  the 
thousand  hearers  who  met  to  listen  to  the  great  Keformer.  But  France 
was  the  main  feeder  of  the  Academy;  Frenchmen  filled  its  chairs,  occupied 
its  benches,  learned  in  it  the  courage  to  live  and  the  will  to  die.  From 
Geneva  books  poured  into  France ;  and  the  French  Church  was  ever 
appealing  for  ministers,  yet  never  appealed  in  vain.  Within  eleven 
years,  1555-66  —  Calvin  died  in  1564  —  it  is  known  that  Geneva  sent 
161  pastors  into  France  ;  how  many  more  may  have  gone,  unrecorded, 
we  cannot  tell.  And  they  were  learned  men,  strenuous,  fearless,  praised 
by  a  French  Bishop  as  modest,  grave,  saintly,  with  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  ever  on  their  lips.  Charles  IX  implored  the  magistrates  of 
Geneva  to  stop  the  supply  and  withdraw  the  men  already  sent  ;  but  the 
magistrates  replied  that  the  preachers  had  been  sent  not  by  them  but  by 
their  ministers,  who  believed  that  the  sovereign  duty  of  all  Princes  and 
Kings  was  to  do  homage  to  Him  who  had  given  to  them  their  dominion. 
It  was  small  wonder  that  the  Venetian  Suriauo  should  describe  Geneva 
as  "  the  mine  whence  came  the  ore  of  heresy  "  ;  or  tliat  the  Protestants 
should  gather  courage  as  they  heard  the  men  from  Geneva  sing  psalms 
in  the  face  of  torture  and  death. 

It  was  indeed  a  very  different  France  which  the  eyes  of  the  dying 
Calvin  saw  from  that  which  the  young  man  had  seen  thirty  years  before. 
Religious  hate  was  even  more  bitter  and  vindictive  ;  war  had  come 
and  made  persecution  more  ferocious  ;  but  the  Huguenots  had  grown 
numerous,  potent,  respected,  feared,  and  disputed  with  Catholicism  the 
supremacy  of  the  kingdom.  And  Calvin  had  done  it,  not  by  arms  nor 
by  threats,  nor  by  encouragement  of  sedition  or  insurrection  —  to  such 
action  he  was  ever  resolutely  opposed  —  but  by  the  agency  of  the  men 
whom  he  formed  in  Geneva,  and  by  their  persuasive  speech.  The  Reformed 
minister  was  essentially  a  preacher,  intellectual,  exegetical,  argumentative, 
seriously  concerned  with  the  subjects  that  most  appealed  to  the  serious- 
minded.  Modern  oratory  may  be  said  to  begin  with  him,  and  indeed  to 
be  his  creation.  He  helped  to  make  the  vernacular  tongues  of  Western 
Europe  literary.  He  accustomed  the  people  to  hear  the  gravest  and 
most  sacred  themes  discussed  in  the  language  which  the}-  knew;  and  the 
themes  ennobled  the  language,  the  language  was  never  allowed  to  degrade 
the  themes.  And  there  was  no  tongue  and  no  people  that  he  influenced 
more  than  the  French.  Calvin  made  Bossuet  and  Massillon  possible ;  as 
a  preacher  he  found  his  successor  in  Bourdaloue  ;  and  a  literary  critic  who 
does  not  love  him  has  expressed  a  doubt  as  to  whether  Pascal  could  be 
more  eloquent  or  was  so  profound.     And  the  ideal  then  realised   in 


374  The  Conslstori/ 


Geneva  exercised  an  influence  far  beyond  France.  It  extended  into 
Holland,  which  in  the  strength  of  the  Reformed  faith  resisted  Charles  V 
and  his  son,  achieved  independence,  and  created  the  freest  and  best 
educated  State  on  the  continent  of  Europe.  John  Knox  breathed  for 
awhile  the  atmosphere  of  Geneva,  was  subdued  into  the  likeness  of  the 
man  who  had  made  it,  and  when  he  went  home  he  copied  its  education 
and  tried  to  repeat  its  Reformation.  English  Reformers,  fleeing  from 
martyrdom,  found  a  refuge  within  its  hospitable  walls,  and,  returning  to 
England,  attempted  to  establish  a  Genevan  discipline,  and  failed,  but 
succeeded  in  forming  the  Puritan  character.  If  the  author  of  the  Or- 
donnances  Ecclesiastiques  accomplished,  whether  directly  or  indirectly, 
so  much,  we  need  not  hesitate  to  term  him  a  notable  friend  to 
civilisation. 

The  Consistory  may  be  described  as  Calvin's  method  for  moralising 
through  the  Church  the  life  of  man  and  the  State  to  which  he  belonged. 
He  may  in  the  manner  of  the  jurist  have  imagined  that  regulation  by 
positive  law  was  the  most  efficient  means  of  governing  conduct ;  but  if 
he  legislated  as  a  jurist,  he  thought  and  purposed  as  a  Reformer.  It  is 
here,  where  injustice  is  easiest,  that  we  ought  to  be  most  scrupulously 
just.  Calvin  was  resolved,  so  far  as  he  had  power,  to  make  the  Church 
what  it  had  not  been  but  what  it  ought  to  be,  an  institution  organised 
for  the  creation  of  a  moral  mankind.  For  this  reason  he  claimed  for  it 
the  right  of  excommunication  and  the  power  to  excommunicate.  But 
as  he  conceived  the  matter,  the  exercise  of  the  power  which  followed 
from  the  possession  of  the  right,  while  spiritual  in  essence  and  in  purpose, 
might  yet  be  civil  in  certain  of  its  effects.  The  Consistory  was  a  body 
appointed  to  be  the  guardian  of  morals,  and  therefore  possessed  of  the 
power  to  excommunicate. 

It  was  composed  of  six  ministers  and  twelve  elders.  The  elders 
were  to  be  elected  annually,  and  were  to  be  men  of  good  and  honour- 
able conduct,  blameless  and  free  from  suspicion,  animated  by  the  fear 
of  God  and  endowed  with  spiritual  wisdom.  They  were  to  be  chosen, 
two  from  the  Smaller  Council,  four  from  the  Council  of  Sixty,  and  six 
from  the  Great  Council ;  they  were  to  be  elected  at  the  same  time  as 
the  magistrates,  were  to  be  capable  of  re-election,  and  were  to  take 
the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  State  and  fidelity  to  the  Church.  They 
represented  the  idea  that  Geneva  was  a  Church-State ;  and  their  du- 
ties were  to  have  their  eyes  upon  every  man,  family,  or  district,  to  have 
their  ears  open  to  every  complaint,  to  punish  every  offence  according 
to  a  carefully-graduated  scale,  and  to  enforce  purity  everywhere.  The 
Consistory's  jurisdiction  was  not  civil,  but  spiritual  ;  the  sword  which  it 
wielded  was  not  Caesar's  but  Christ's,  yet  it  had  rights  of  entry  and 
investigation  that  were  not  so  much  Christ's  as  Caesar's.  It  was  a  judi- 
cial body  and  sat  every  Thursday  to  examine  charges  of  misconduct  or 


The  State  and  heresy  375 

immorality,  to  pass  sentences  from  which  there  was  no  appeal,  and  where 
necessary  to  hand  the  guilty  over  to  the  magistrates  to  be  punished 
according  to  law.  If  any  offender  refused  to  appear,  a  civil  officer  was 
sent  to  bring  him  ;  and  so  every  ecclesiastical  offence  became  an  act  of 
civil  disobedience.  Thus,  obstinate  refusal  to  communicate  was  regarded 
as  a  punishable  crime  ;  so  were  frivolous  or  continued  absence  from  church, 
disrespect  to  parents,  blasphemy,  and  adultery.  One  young  woman  who 
sang  profane  songs  was  banished,  and  another  who  sang  them  to  psalm- 
tunes  was  scourged.  Heresy  became  as  much  an  offence  as  immorality. 
If  a  creed  or  confession  becomes  a  law  of  the  State  as  well  as  of  the  Church, 
to  speak  or  agitate  against  it  becomes  treason.  In  other  words,  if  opinion 
is  established  by  law,  heresy  is  turned  into  crime.  And  this  Geneva  soon 
discovered.  Castellio's  doubts  as  to  the  canonicity  of  Solomon's  Song, 
and  as  to  the  received  interpretation  of  Christ's  descent  into  Hades, 
Bolsec's  criticism  of  predestination,  Gruet's  suspected  scepticism  and 
possession  of  infidel  books,  Servetus'  rationalism  and  anti-Trinitarian 
creed,  were  all  opinions  judged  to  be  criminal.  Infallibility  is  not  the 
only  system  that  makes  heres}^  culpable  and  the  heretic  guilty.  If  the 
Church  will  be  a  State,  and  enforce  its  laws,  which  must  affect  both 
conduct  and  belief,  by  the  only  method  a  State  can  follow,  then  it  must 
bear  the  reproach  of  being  more  cruel,  and  therefore  more  unjust,  than 
any  purely  civil  power.  The  heretic  may  be  a  man  of  irreproachable 
character  ;  but  if  heresy  be  treason  against  the  law,  a  character  without 
reproach  may  aggravate  rather  than  extenuate  the  crime.  The  man  of 
imperfect  morals  may  be  too  feeble  of  will  to  differ  in  opinion  from  the 
constituted^  authority,  and  his  intellectual  conformity  may  save  him  from 
the  sentence  which  his  moral  weakness  deserves.  And  time  alone  was 
needed  to  make  it  obvious  how  imperfectly  Geneva  could  attain  either 
unit}^  of  faith  or  purity  of  life  by  turning  her  Church  into  a  city  governed 
by  positive  law. 

Many  points  remain  of  necessity  undiscussed.  The  merits  and 
defects  of  Calvin  as  a  writer  of  polemical  treatises  ;  his  work  as  a 
statesman,  and  his  appreciation  of  political  questions  in  lands  so  unlike 
his  own  as  England  ;  his  qualities  as  a  correspondent  who  feels  no  affairs 
of  State  too  large  to  grapple  with,  and  no  personal  concern  too  small  to 
touch  ;  his  worth  and  wisdom  as  an  adviser  who  loves  the  great  of  the 
earth  for  the  good  they  can  do,  and  judges  that  the  higher  a  person  is 
placed  the  more  need  there  is  for  plain  and  candid  speech,  but  who 
forgets  not  the  humble  and  the  poor,  and  can  pause  amid  the  mightiest 
concerns  to  hear  their  plaints  ;  his  attachment  and  tenderness  as  a  friend, 
whether  in  his  brilliant  youth  or  his  sadder  age,  when  he  loved  to 
unbosom  himself  to  his  strenuous  comrade  Guillaume  Farel,  or  his  devoted 
companion  Pierre  Viret  —  could  have  justice  done  them  only  were  the 
limits  of  our  space  wholly  different  from  what  they  are. 

But  there  are  three  things  that  may  be  emphasised  in  conclusion.  The 


376  Some  special  services  of  Calvin 

first  is  Calvin's  irenical  services  to  Protestantism.  He  made  the  Reformed 
Church  less  antithetical  to  the  Lutheran,  and  the  Lutheran  leaders 
better  understood  among  the  Reformed.  His  doctrine  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  may  be  described  as  a  spiritual  doctrine  of  the  Real  Presence  ; 
he  escaped  the  miserable  perplexities  which  lurked  in  the  scholastic 
notion  of  Substantia,  and  were  used  to  justify  Transubstantiation  on  the 
one  hand,  and  Consubstantiation  on  the  other.  Where  faith  was,  there 
the  Lord  was,  and  where  it  was  not  there  could  be  no  idea  of  Him,  and 
no  image  or  symbol  could  speak  of  His  presence.  Secondl3%  mention 
must  be  made  of  Calvin's  services  to  the  French  tongue.  He  perhaps  more 
than  any  other  man  made  it  a  literary  vehicle,  a  medium  for  high  philo- 
sophical and  religious  discussion.  The  Institutio  has  been  said  to  be  the 
first  book  written  in  French  which  can  be  described  as  logically  composed, 
built  up  according  to  a  consecutive  and  proportioned  plan.  The  style 
is  the  man,  exact,  sober,  precise,  restrained  ;  sad  perhaps,  or  a  trifle  cold, 
but  full  of  conviction  and  reason.  The  French  he  speaks  is  a  natural 
product,  an  evolution  and  a  new  phase  of  the  medieval  French,  refreshed, 
vivified,  made  simpler  and  more  living  by  baptism  in  its  original  source, 
classical  Latinity.  Thirdly,  his  services  to  the  cause  of  sacred  learning- 
must  not  be  forgotten.  These  it  is  hardly  possible  to  exaggerate  ; 
he  is  the  sanest  of  commentators,  the  most  skilled  of  exegetes,  the 
most  reasonable  of  critics.  He  knows  how  to  use  an  age  to  interpret 
a  man,  a  man  to  interpret  an  age.  His  exegesis  is  never  forced  or 
fantastic  ;  he  is  less  rash  and  subjective  in  his  judgments  than 
Luther  ;  more  reverent  to  Scripture,  more  faithful  to  history,  more 
modern  in  spirit.  His  work  on  the  Psalms  has  much  to  make  our 
most  advanced  scholars  ashamed  of  the  small  progress  we  have  made 
either  in  method  or  in  conclusions.  And  his  work  is  inspired  by  a 
noble  belief  ;  he  thought  that  the  one  way  to  realise  Christianity  was  by 
knowing  the  mind  of  Christ  ;  that  this  mind  was  expressed  in  the 
Scriptures ;  and  that  to  make  them  living  and  credible  was  to  make 
indefinitely  more  possible  its  incorporation  in  the  thoughts  and  institu- 
tions of  man.  It  is  by  his  service  to  this  cause  that  Calvin  must  be 
ultimately  judged. 


CHAPTER   XII 

THE   CATHOLIC    SOUTH 

The  great  wave  of  revolution  and  reconstruction  which  was  passing 
over  northern  Europe  in  the  earlier  half  of  the  sixteenth  century  did  not 
leave  the  south  untouched.  Though  the  first  actual  outbreak  occurred 
beyond  the  Alps,  the  feeling  to  which  it  gave  expression  was  not  merely 
Teutonic.  Many  of  the  causes  which  led  up  to  it  were  common  to  all 
Western  Christendom ;  some,  as  for  instance  the  demand  for  liberty  of 
opinion  and  free  enquiry,  were  even  more  characteristic  of  Italy  than 
of  Germany.  Accordingly,  vigorous  attempts  arose  in  many  parts  of 
southern  Europe  to  bring  about  a  reformation  in  the  Church  —  attempts 
which  were  by  no  means  a  mere  echo  of  the  changes  in  the  north.  But 
they  never  obtained  a  really  strong  hold  upon  the  affections  of  the 
common  people,  and  never  secured  the  friendship,  or  even  the  neutrality, 
of  the  civil  power ;  and  so,  both  in  Italy  and  in  the  Iberian  peninsula, 
their  suppression  was  onl}^  a  question  of  time.  By  the  year  1576,  when 
the  charges  against  Bartolome  Carranza  were  finally  adjudicated  upon, 
they  were  practically  at  an  end.  Isolated  cases  of  heresy  still  occurred, 
but  there  was  no  longer  anything  like  an  organised  revolt  against  the 
doctrinal  or  disciplinary  system  of  the  Papacy. 

In  tracing  the  course  of  the  Reform  movements  of  southern  Europe 
we  are  dealing  with  forces  which  became  more  widely  divergent  as  time 
went  on.  Men  at  first  acted  together  who  ultimately  found  themselves 
violently  opposed  to  one  another  ;  principles  were  adduced  on  the  same 
side  which  proved  in  time  to  be  sharply  contrasted.  The  old-standing 
desire  to  curb  the  power  of  the  Curia  and  to  vindicate  the  authority  of 
General  Councils  over  the  whole  Church  joined  hands  in  the  earlier  stages 
of  the  novement  with  the  wider,  yet  more  individualistic,  aspirations  of 
the  Renaissance.  Men  who  had  come  under  the  influence  of  the  new  spirit 
in  any  ol  its  manifestations  were  able  to  work  together  at  first,  whether 
they  strove  to  reconstruct  a  worn-out  theology,  or  to  abolish  corrupt 
practices,  or  to  restore  the  standard  of  personal  devotion  and  moral 
conduct.  It  was  only  by  degrees  that  the  ascetic,  the  humanist,  and  the 
doctrinal  Reformer  drifted  into  relations  of  antagonism  ;  but  this  was 
the  positioi.  ultimately  reached.  And  a  stronger  line  of  division  appeared 
as  time  went  on.     There  were  some  who  refused  to  take  any  step  which 

377 

\ 


378  The  papacy  of  Adrian  VI  [1522-^ 

would  separate  them  from  the  communion  of  the  Church  ;  as  Carnesecchi 
expressed  it,  the  Catholic  religion  was  theirs  already,  and  all  that  they 
desired  was  that  it  should  be  better  preached.  Others  however  felt 
compelled  to  withdraw  from  the  fellowship  of  a  corrupt  society,  still 
strenuously  affirming  that  by  so  doing  they  had  in  no  way  departed 
from  the  unity  of  the  Church.  Of  the  former,  many  were  influenced  by 
the  doctrinal  movement  in  its  most  extreme  forms,  and  some  even  died 
for  their  opinions  without  giving  way.  Of  the  latter,  many  recognised 
that  their  action  could  only  be  justified  by  the  immediate  claims  of 
Christian  truth.  But  in  spite  of  individual  divergences,  here  was  a  real 
line  of  division,  in  southern  Europe  as  in  the  north. 


THE   REFORMATION   IN   ITALY 

So  far  as  the  movement  was  one  of  protest  against  practical  abuses, 
the  need  for  Reform  was  not  less  widely  felt  in  Italy  than  in  Germany. 
Rodrigo  Nino,  the  imperial  ambassador  to  the  Doge  and  Signory, 
wrote  in  1535  that  there  were  few  in  Venice  who  were  not  more  Lutheran 
than  Luther  himself  with  regard  to  such  matters  as  the  reform  of  the 
clergy  and  their  secular  state.  Venice  was  no  doubt  exceptional,  and 
the  state  of  feeling  there  was  not  that  of  Italy  as  a  whole.  Nevertheless, 
vigorous  efforts  after  practical  reform  had  begun  in  other  parts  of  Italy 
long  before  this.  Adrian  of  Utrecht,  Bishop  of  Tortosa,  the  friend  of 
Erasmus,  and  the  former  tutor  of  Charles  V,  ascended  the  papal  throne 
in  1522  with  a  firm  resolve  to  set  the  Church  in  order,  and  to  begin 
with  his  own  household.  In  many  ways  he  seemed  well  fitted  for  the 
task.  A  student  of  distinction,  his  uprightness,  personal  piety,  and 
strictness  of  life  were  known  to  all  men  ;  and  already,  as  Legate  in  Spain, 
he  had  taken  a  vigorous  part  in  the  reform  of  the  Religious  Houses  there. 
But  in  Rome  he  proved  to  be  quite  helpless.  Satisfied  with  the  scholastic 
theology  in  which  he  was  so  great  an  adept,  he  did  not  understand  the 
questionings  which  were  beginning  to  stir  the  minds  of  others.  The 
Romans  had  no  fellow-feeling  for  a  man  who  never  gave  way  to  anger 
or  to  mirth,  and  to  whom  the  treasures  of  sculpture  in  the  Vaticaa  were 
no  more  than  "pagan  idols."  The  scholar  who  had  done  so  much  to 
foster  learning  at  Louvain  was  to  them  only  a  stranger  who  kaew  no 
Italian,  though  he  spoke  Latin  very  well  "  for  a  barbarian."  Moreover, 
the  Curia  was  determined  not  to  be  reformed.  Thus  Adrian  achieved 
nothing  ;  he  died  unregretted  in  1523,  not  without  the  usual  suspicion 
of  poison  ;  and  from  that  time  forward  every  Pope  has  been  an  Italian. 

But  already  an  important  movement  had  been  inaugurated.  Just 
before  or  shortly  after  the  accession  of  Adrian  VI,  a  number  A  earnest- 
minded  men,  clergy  and  laity,  had  banded  themselves  togetlier  at  Rome 


1524-59]  The  Oratory  of  Divine  Love  379 

in  the  famous  "  Oratory  of  Divine  Love,"  to  work  and  pray  for  the 
purification  of  the  Church.  Their  leaders  were  Giovanni  Pietro  Caraffa, 
afterwards  Pope  Paul  IV,  and  the  Count  Gaetano  da  Thiene,  who  was 
subsequently  canonised.  The  society  consisted  of  fifty  or  sixty  distin- 
guished men,  including  amongst  others  Jacopo  Sadoleto,  Giamraatteo 
Giberti,  Latino  Giovenale,  Girolamo  and  Luigi  Lippomano,  and  Giuli- 
ano  Dati.  They  held  their  spiritual  exercises  in  the  Church  of  Santi 
Silvestro  e  Dorotea,  of  which  Dati  was  curate,  and  consulted  together 
on  the  evils  of  the  day.  In  1524  Gaetano  withdrew  to  form  a  new  Order 
of  Clerks  Regular,  who  were  presently  joined  by  Caraffa,  and  came  to  be 
known  as  Theatines  from  his  see  of  Theate  (Chieti  in  the  Abruzzi)  ;  but 
the  original  society  still  continued  to  meet  until  it  was  dispersed  by  the 
Sack  of  Rome  in  1527.  Many  of  its  former  members,  including  Caraffa 
and  Giberti,  met  again  at  Venice,  where  they  came  under  the  influence 
of  the  senator  Gasparo  Contarini.  By  degrees  others  were  admitted  to 
their  consultations,  including  Gregorio  Cortese,  the  Abbot  of  San  Giorgio 
Maggiore,  Pietro  Bembo,  and  Luigi  Priuli,  and  subsequently  Brucioli, 
the  Florentine  exile,  the  learned  scholar  Marcantonio  Flaminio,  and 
the  Englishman  Reginald  Pole.  Contarini,  still  a  layman,  became  from 
this  time  forward  the  leading  spirit  amongst  them. 

When  the  enlightened  Alessandro  Farnese  became  Pope  as  Paul  III 
(1534),  he  found  this  group  of  zealous  men  ready  to  his  hand.  Contarini 
was  made  a  Cardinal  at  his  first  creation,  and  Sadoleto,  Caraffa,  and  Pole 
received  the  purple  in  the  following  year.  In  1537,  when  he  appointed 
a  commission  to  suggest  measures  for  the  reform  of  the  Church,  most 
of  its  members  were  chosen  from  this  quarter,  the  names  being  those  of 
Contarini,  Caraffa,  Sadoleto,  Pole,  Fregoso,  Aleander,  Giberti,  Cortese, 
and  Tommaso  Badia.  The  fruit  of  their  labours,  the  famous  Consilium 
de  emendanda  Ecclesia^  was  unsparing  in  reprobation  of  abuses  and  rich 
in  practical  suggestions.  But  although  a  few  efforts  were  made  to 
simplify  the  procedure  of  the  Curia,  the  forces  of  inertia  proved  too 
strong,  and  the  Consilium  was  little  more  than  a  dead  letter.  In  after 
years  it  fell  into  bad  odour,  partly  owing  to  its  damaging  admissions, 
partly  because  the  Lutherans  had  taken  it  up.  Moreover  Caraffa  came 
in  time  to  suspect  many  of  his  former  associates  of  heresy  ;  and  after  he 
became  Pope  the  work  was  placed  on  the  Index  Lihrorum  Prohihitorum 
of  1559.  But,  even  had  it  been  otherwise  received,  it  could  not  have 
stayed  the  tide.  The  revolt  against  abuses  had  already  opened  the  way 
to  movements  of  a  more  destructive  character  ;  the  new  opinions  were 
already  making  their  appearance  south  of  the  Alps. 

Italy,  always  a  land  of  popular  movements,  was  in  many  ways 
predisposed  to  welcome  the  new  opinions.  Some  of  them  had  been 
foreshadowed  there,  and  revolt  against  the  Papacy  was  to  its  peoples  no 
new  thing.  The  Cathari  of  the  north,  with  their  Manichean  and  anti- 
trinitarian  tendencies,  had  long  died  out ;  but  the  Waldenses,  although 


380  German  influence  in  Italy  [i5i9-43 

by  no  means  so  numerous  as  formerly,  were  still  to  be  found  in  the 
valleys  of  Piedmont  and  Calabria.  The  movements  of  the  sixteenth 
century  in  Italy  were  however  entirely  unconnected  with  these,  and  the 
impulse  as  a  whole  came  from  without.  There  is  indeed  one  notable 
exception.  Pietro  Speziale  of  Cittadella  finished  his  great  work  De 
G-ratia  Dei  in  1542 ;  but  he  tells  us,  with  obvious  sincerity,  that  he  had 
formulated  his  theory  of  Justification  and  Grace  thirty  years  earlier, 
before  Luther  had  begun  to  preach.  In  the  main  he  agrees  with  that  of 
Luther,  but  he  resolutely  asserts  the  freedom  of  the  will,  and  repudiates 
the  Lutheran  teaching  on  this  subject;  and  although  he  speaks  strongly 
against  particular  abuses,  he  does  not  undervalue  the  Church  system  of 
his  day.  The  old  man  was  thrown  into  prison  in  1543,  escaped  six 
years  afterwards  by  the  help  of  two  Anabaptists  and  joined  their  party, 
and  subsequently  made  a  formal  recantation  in  prison.  But  Speziale 
stands  alone ;  and  it  is  clear  that  the  doctrinal  revolt  as  a  whole  came 
from  the  north. 

The  intercourse  between  Italy  and  Germany  was  very  close ;  and  a 
continual  stream  of  traders  and  students  flowed  in  both  directions.  At 
Venice  there  was  a  large  Teutonic  colony,  having  its  centre  in  the 
Fondaco  de'  Tedeschi.  The  imperial  army  which  invaded  Italy  in  1526 
contained  a  large  number  of  Lutherans  ;  and  with  Georgvon  Frundsberg's 
Landshiechte  there  came  the  scholar  Jakob  Ziegler,  later  known  in  Venice 
as  Luther's  lieutenant.  The  commonwealth  of  letters  ignored  national 
boundaries ;  and  there  was  a  brisk  correspondence  between  Luther  and 
Zwingli  and  their  admirers  in  Italy.  So  early  as  1519  Luther's  works 
were  being  sold  in  Lombardy  by  Francesco  Calvi  or  Minicio,  a  bookseller 
of  Pavia,  who  had  procured  a  stock  from  Froben  at  Basel.  In  the 
following  year,  as  we  learn  from  a  letter  of  Burchard  von  Schenk,  they 
were  eagerly  purchased  at  Venice;  and  Marino  Sanuto  notes  in  his  Diary 
that  a  seizure  of  them  had  been  made  at  the  instance  of  the  patriarch, 
though  not  until  part  of  the  stock  had  been  disposed  of.  Writings  of 
Luther,  Melanchthon,  and  others  were  presently  translated  into  Italian  ; 
and  being  issued  anonymously  or  under  fictitious  names,  they  circulated 
widely.  Thus  Luther's  sermons  on  the  Lord's  Prayer  appeared  anony- 
mously before  1525,  and  Melanchthon's  Loci  Communes  about  1534 
under  the  title  IFrincipii  della  Teologia  by  "  Ippofilo  da  Terra  Nigra  "  ; 
while  other  tracts  of  Luther's  were  subsequently  tacked  on  to  the 
posthumously  issued  works  of  Cardinal  Federigo  Fregoso. 

In  ways  such  as  these  the  opinions  of  Luther  spread,  and  in  a  less 
degree  those  of  Zwingli.  There  were  many  who  were  ready  to  adopt 
them,  in  whole  or  in  part.  A  hermit  who  inveighed  against  "  priests 
and  friars  "  at  Venice  in  1516  can  hardly  be  called  a  Lutheran  ;  but  Fra 
Andrea  of  Ferrara,  who  preached  at  Christmas,  1520.  at  San  Marco  and 
in  the  open  air,  is  expressly  said  to  have  "  followed  the  doctrine  of  Martin 
Luther."     So   did   a    Carmelite    friar,   Giambattista   Pallavicino,  who 


1524-55]  The  Reform  at  Venice  381 

preached  at  Brescia  in  Lent,  1527,  and  others  elsewhere.  There  were 
three  "  heretics  "  at  Mirandola  in  1524  of  whom  nothing  else  is  known  ; 
but  the  Florentine  physician  Girolamo  di  Bartolommeo  Buonagrazia, 
when  proceeded  against  in  1531,  confessed  that  he  had  been  in  corre- 
spondence with  Luther  in  1527,  and  accepted  his  doctrine.  Nor  was 
Zwingii  without  supporters.  The  letters  of  Egidio  della  Porta,  an 
Austin  friar  of  Como  (a  centre  of  heresy  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Julius  II),  prove  that  he  and  some  of  his  fellows  were  ready  to  leave 
Italy  and  throw  in  their  lot  with  Zwingii  in  1525-6.  In  1531  a  native 
of  Como  who  had  spent  three  years  beyond  the  Alps  was  preaching 
against  the  current  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist.  About  the  same  time 
priests  at  Como  were  laying  hands  on  others,  who  were  to  administer 
the  Eucharist  in  both  kinds  :  one  of  them,  Vincenzio  Massaro,  is  said  to 
have  taken  a  fee  of  fifteen  ducats  from  all  whom  he  ordained.  And  a 
letter  written  in  1530  by  Francesco  Negri  of  Bassano,  who  had  fled  from 
a  Benedictine  House  at  Padua  and  joined  Zwingii,  and  who  afterwards 
drifted  to  Anabaptism,  gives  the  names  of  many  priests  in  North  Italy 
whom  he  reckoned  as  "brethren." 

The  disaffected  were  very  numerous.  According  to  the  ambassador 
Francesco  Contarini,  the  Lutherans  of  Germany  boasted  in  1535  that 
their  sympathisers  in  Italy  alone  would  make  an  army  sufficient  to 
deliver  them  from  the  priests,  and  that  they  had  enough  friends  in 
the  monastic  orders  to  intimidate  all  who  were  opposed  to  them.  This 
of  course  is  a  violent  exaggeration,  and  in  Italy  also  popular  rumour 
magnified  the  danger ;  yet  even  so  it  was  not  slight.  The  Reforming 
movement  was  especially  strong  in  certain  well-defined  centres,  the  chief 
being  Venice  and  its  territories,  Ferrara,  Modena,  Naples,  and  Lucca. 

In  Venice,  where  foreigners  were  many  and  toleration  was  a  principle 
of  the  State,  the  Reform  soon  made  its  appearance,  and  before  long 
found  a  home.  Measures  of  precaution  or  repression  were  demanded 
by  the  Patriarch  on  behalf  of  the  Roman  Curia  ;  but  as  late  as  1529  the 
Signory  was  able  to  certify  that,  excepting  for  the  tolerated  German 
conventicles,  the  city  was  free  from  heresy.  Soon  afterwards  however, 
in  a  report  to  Clement  VII  on  the  subject,  Caraffa  mentions,  amongst 
other  evils,  the  fact  that  many  friars  had  fallen  into  heresy,  and  in  par- 
ticular the  disciples  of  "a  certain  Franciscan  now  dead."  Of  these  he 
names  Girolamo  Galateo,  Bartolommeo  Fonzio,  and  Alessandro  da  Piero 
di  Sacco.  The  Bishop  of  Chieti  was  thereupon  commissioned,  by  a 
brief  of  May  9,  1530,  to  proceed  against  Galateo ;  and  from  this  time 
forward  the  extirpation  of  heresy  was  the  ruling  passion  of  his  life.  He 
it  was  who  procured  from  Pope  Paul  III  the  bull  Licet  ah  initio  (July  21, 
1542)  reorganising  the  Roman  Inquisition  on  the  basis  of  that  of  Spain. 
He  was  its  first  head,  and  in  1555,  as  Pope  Paul  IV,  he  completed  the 
extension  of  its  power  over  the  whole  of  Italy. 


382  Galateo  and  Fonzio  [i;joS-62 

Galateo  was  already  in  prison  on  suspicion  of  heresy  for  certain 
sermons  preached  "  Bible  in  hand "  at  Padua  ;  but  under  the  lenient 
system  of  the  Venetian  Inquisition  he  was  soon  at  liberty.  Caraffa  now 
commenced  a  new  process  against  him  ;  he  was  found  guilty,  and 
sentenced  to  degradation  and  death.  This  led  to  a  contest  with  the 
Signory,  who  delivered  him  from  Caraffa's  hands  and  consigned  him  to 
prison.  Here  he  had  been  for  seven  years,  when,  on  the  intercession  of 
a  friendly  senator,  he  was  allowed  to  make  his  defence  in  writing.  This 
Confession  is  remarkable.  It  is  Augustinian  rather  than  Lutheran  in 
doctrine.  It  affirms  the  doctrine  of  saving  faith  without  any  extravagant 
depreciation  of  free-will  or  of  good  works  ;  the  system  of  the  Church  as 
a  whole  is  defended,  and  the  Pope  is  "  the  chief  of  shepherds."  Galateo 
was  allowed  out  on  bail,  but  directed  to  amend  his  Confession  on  some 
points.  He  refused  to  do  this,  and  three  years  later  was  cast  into  prison 
again,  where  he  died  in  1541. 

Of  Galateo's  two  companions,  Alessandro  was  already  in  prison,  and 
is  not  heard  of  again.  Bartolommeo  Fonzio  had  already  incurred  the 
enmity  of  Caraffa  by  his  advocacy  of  Henry  VIIFs  divorce  ;  he  managed 
however  to  clear  himself  of  heresy,  and  soon  left  Venice  for  Germany, 
where  he  was  employed  as  a  papal  agent.  But  he  fell  under  the  suspicion 
of  Aleander  and  others  by  his  intercourse  with  the  Lutherans  ;  and  not 
without  reason,  for  it  was  probably  he  who  translated  Luther's  letter 
An  den  christliehen  Adel  into  Italian.  On  retiring  from  the  papal 
service  he  was  transferred  by  Clement  VII  from  the  Order  of  Friars 
Minor  to  the  Third  Order  of  St  Francis  and  permitted  to  return  to 
Venice  ;  but  he  was  still  an  object  of  suspicion,  which  was  not  diminished 
by  a  little  Catechism  which  he  produced.  After  years  of  wandering  he 
settled  as  Padua  and  opened  a  school ;  but  it  was  broken  up  by  order 
of  Caraffa,  now  Inquisitor-General.  Thence  he  passed  to  Cittadella, 
where  reformed  opinions  were  widespread,  and  again  began  to  teach, 
soon  winning  the  love  of  the  people.  But  in  May,  1558,  he  was  again 
arrested,  by  order  of  the  Died,  and  condemned  after  four  years' 
examination  for  the  general  unsatisfactoriness  of  his  teaching.  He  was 
called  upon  to  abjure  but  refused ;  then  gave  way  to  persuasion  and 
recanted  ;  then  recanted  his  recantation.  At  length  he  was  sentenced 
to  death  at  the  stake ;  the  sentence  was  as  usual  commuted  into  one  of 
drowning,  and  he  was  cast  into  the  sea  on  August  4,  1562. 

Meanwhile,  other  teachers  were  going  further  in  the  direction  of 
Lutheranism  than  Galateo  and  Fonzio.  Giulio  della  Rovere,  an  Austin 
Friar  of  Milan,  got  into  trouble  at  Bologna  in  1538  for  a  course  of 
sermons  preached  there.  Three  years  later  he  came  to  Venice,  and 
preached  at  San  Cassiano  in  Lent,  staying  in  the  house  of  Celio  Secondo 
Curione,  of  whom  more  presently.  His  doctrine  was  attacked  ;  he 
abjured,  and  was  sentenced  to  be  imprisoned  and  then  banished.  He 
escaped  and  fled  to  the  Grisons,  where  the  Reform  movement  had  already 


1532-71]  Progress  of  heresy 


taken  root,  the  main  impulse  coming  from  the  Swiss  Cantons.  Here 
he  ministered,  generally  at  Poschiavo,  until  his  death  in  1571.  The 
Florentine  scholar  Antonio  Brucioli,  banished  from  his  own  city,  had 
come  to  Venice  and  set  up  a  printing-press.  In  1532  (two  years  before 
Luther's  German  translation  was  completed)  he  published  his  Italian 
translation  of  the  whole  Bible,  based  upon  Santi  Pagnani's  learned 
Latin  version  from  the  original  languages  ;  and  this  he  followed  up 
subsequently  by  a  voluminous  commentary.  In  1546  he  was  in  the 
prisons  of  the  Inquisition,  accused  of  publishing  heretical  books  ;  and 
although  it  may  be  doubted  whether  anything  of  his  could  justly  be  so 
described,  his  troubles  at  the  hands  of  the  Holy  Office  ended  only  with 
his  life.  A  more  striking  personality  was  that  of  Baldo  Lupetino  of 
Albona  in  Istria,  uncle  of  the  well-known  Mattia  Vlacich  (M.  Flacius 
Illyricus.  He  was  a  conventual  Franciscan,  and  had  held  the  office  of 
provincial  ;  an  acute  scholar  and  a  devout  man.  Accused  of  preaching 
heresy  in  the  Duomo  at  Cherso,  he  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Venetian 
Inquisition  in  1541 ;  and,  although  the  Lutheran  Princes  interceded  on 
his  behalf,  he  was  sentenced  to  imprisonment  for  life,  it  being  clear  from 
depositions  made  then  and  subsequently  that  he  was  a  Lutheran.  In 
1547  he  was  again  in  trouble  for  preaching  to  his  fellow-prisoners,  and 
was  sentenced  to  be  beheaded,  his  body  to  be  burned,  and  his  ashes  to 
be  cast  into  the  sea  "  to  the  honour  and  glory  of  Jesus  Christ."  The 
Doge  relaxed  the  sentence  ;  but  in  1555  he  was  again  accused,  and  the 
following  year  he  was  degraded  and  drowned. 

Nor  were  disciples  lacking.  The  letters  of  Aleander,  when  Nuncio  at 
Venice,  speak  of  a  great  religious  association  of  artisans  existing  there  in 
1534,  the  leaders  being  one  Pietro  Buonavita  of  Padua,  a  carpenter,  a 
French  glover,  and  several  German  Lutherans.  The  two  first-mentioned 
were  taken  and  imprisoned  for  life  ;  but  Aleander  continues  to  lament  the 
progress  of  heresy  and  the  apathy  of  the  Senate.  We  learn  more  about 
the  Reformed  in  Venetian  lands  from  the  letters  of  Baldassare  Altieri  of 
Aqiiila  in  the  Abruzzi,  a  literary  adventurer  who  came  to  Venice  about 
1540,  served  Sir  Edmund  Hastwell,  the  English  ambassador,  till  1548, 
and  after  two  j^ears  of  wandering  died  at  Ferrara  in  August,  1550.  He 
acted  as  a  kind  of  secretary  to  the  Reformed,  and  wrote  on  behalf  of 
"  the  brethren  of  the  Church  of  Venice,  Vicenza,  and  Treviso  "  to  Luther, 
Bullinger,  and  others,  begging  for  the  good  offices  of  the  Lutherans  with 
the  Venetian  government.  The  brethren  are,  he  says,  in  the  sorest  need, 
and  cannot  improve  their  state  whilst  the  Signory  allows  them  no  liberty. 
They  have  no  public  churches  ;  each  is  a  church  to  himself.  There  are 
plenty  of  apostles,  but  none  properly  called ;  all  is  disorder,  and  false 
teacliers  abound.  Nevertheless,  they  adhere  to  Luther  in  doctrine  as 
against  the  Sacramentaries,  and  do  not  despair,  since  "  God  can  raise  up 
new  Luthers  amongst  them."  But  their  appeals  were  in  vain;  the 
Lutheran  Princes  had  their  hands  full  already,  and  the  Swiss  were  not 


384  The  Court  of  Renee  at  Ferrara  [1528-^9 

likelv  to  help  those  who  sided  with  Luther  against  them.  In  the  end, 
their  associations  were  broken  up.  Many  were  punished,  many  more 
gave  way ;  those  who  were  left  seem  to  have  gravitated  towards  ana- 
baptist and  speculative  views  of  a  very  pronounced  kind. 

It  is  hard  to  form  a  precise  idea  of  the  number  of  the  Reformed  in 
Venice,  but  they  were  evidently  very  numerous.  Processes  for  heresy 
were  very  common,  especially  after  Giovanni  della  Casa  became  Nuncio 
in  1547,  with  orders  to  expedite  the  work.  Of  the  records  which  survive 
many  are  at  Udine ;  but  at  Venice  alone  there  still  remain  over  eight 
hundred  processes  for  Lutheranism  between  1547  and  1600,  and  more 
than  a  hundred  more  for  Anabaptism,  Calvinism,  and  other  heresies. 
The  greater  number  are  from  Venice  itself ;  but  Vicenza,  Brescia  and 
Cittadella  are  represented,  with  a  number  of  smaller  places. 

Fereara,  long  famous  for  learning  and  the  fine  arts,  was  a  centre 
of  hardly  less  importance,  though  in  quite  a  different  way.  Ercole,  the 
son  of  the  reigning  Duke  Alfonso,  had  married  Renee  the  daughter  of 
Louis  XII  of  France  in  1528,  and  succeeded  his  father  six  years  later. 
Renee  had  already  imbibed  the  new  ideas  from  her  cousin  Margaret 
of  Navarre  and  from  her  governess  Madame  de  Soubise,  poetess  and 
translator  of  the  Psalms.  The  latter,  with  the  whole  of  her  distinguished 
family,  followed  her  to  Ferrara;  and  as  most  of  Renee's  suite,  which 
included  Clement  Marot,  the  poet,  were  of  the  same  way  of  thinking,  her 
Court  became  a  rallying-point  for  the  Reformed.  From  France  came  the 
statesman  Hubert  Languet  and  the  poet  Leon  Jamet ;  from  Germany  the 
Court  physician  Johann  Sinapius  and  his  brother  Kilian,  who  acted  as 
a  tutor  to  Renee's  children.  There  were  also  Alberto  Lollio  and  the 
canon  Celio  Calagnani,  joint  founders  of  the  Academy  of  the  Elevati;  the 
physician  Angelo  Manzioli,  whose  famous  Zodiacus  Vitae,  published  by 
him  under  the  pseudonym  Marcello  Palingenio  Stellato,  poured  ridicule  on 
the  monks  and  clergy  ;  and  Fulvio  Peregrino  Morato,  who  had  preceded 
Kilian  Sinapius  in  his  office  but  had  been  banished  in  1539,  perhaps  for 
Lutheran  opinions.  He  returned  to  the  University  in  1539,  bringing 
with  him  his  most  famous  daughter  Olympia  Morata, "  an  infant  prodigy 
who  became  a  distinguished  woman."  She  became  an  intimate  member 
of  Renee's  household,  corresponded  on  equal  terms  with  the  most  learned 
men  of  the  day,  passed  through  a  sceptical  phase  to  devout  Lutheranism, 
and  finally,  having  incurred  her  patron's  anger,  married  a  German 
physician  named  Grunthler  and  accompanied  him  to  his  own  land.  Nor 
were  Renee  and  Olympia  the  only  well-known  women  who  adopted 
Reformed  views  there.  Amongst  others  who  did  so  were  Lavinia  della 
Rovere,  grand-niece  of  Pope  Julius  II,  and  the  Countess  Giulia  Rangone, 
a  daughter  of  the  House  of  Bentivoglio.  One  other  resident  at  the 
Court  must  be  mentioned  —  the  learned  Cretan  who  took  the  name  of 
Francesco  Porto.     He  was  a  man  of  great  caution  and  reticence,  but 


1536-54]  Renee  and  Calvin  385 

devoted  to  the  cause  of  Reform.  After  studying  at  Venice  and  Padua 
and  teaching  for  ten  years  at  the  University  of  Modena,  he  came  to 
Ferrara  in  1546  to  take  the  place  of  Kilian  Sinapius.  The  complaints 
of  the  Pope  led  to  his  expulsion  in  1551.  He  was  again  with  Renee,  as 
her  reader,  in  1553,  but  then  retired  to  Venice  and  ultimately  to  Geneva. 

Hither  also  at  various  times  came  students  and  others  whose  lives 
were  in  danger  elsewhere.  Among  these  was  the  Piedmontese  Celio 
Secondo  Curione,  a  latitudinarian  and  a  student  of  the  Reformed 
doctrines  from  his  youth.  After  several  remarkable  escapes  from 
capture  he  fled  to  Padua,  thence  (after  three  years  as  professor  in 
the  University)  to  Venice,  and  thence  to  Ferrara.  Through  Renee's 
influence  he  received  a  chair  at  Lucca  while  Ochino  was  there,  but 
after  a  short  and  troublous  stay  had  to  take  refuge  beyond  the  Alps. 
But  Ferrara  gave  shelter  to  a  greater  fugitive  than  any  of  Italian 
birth.  Early  in  1536  Renee  was  visited  by  Calvin,  who  had  come  to 
Italy  under  the  assumed  name  of  Espeville.  AVe  have  no  trustworthy 
account  of  the  visit,  but  it  evidently  made  the  deepest  impression  upon 
Renee  and  her  Court.  Apparently  he  celebrated  the  communion  for  them 
in  private ;  certainly  he  incited  them  to  protest  against  the  accustomed 
services.  In  fact,  on  Holy  Saturday  (April  14),  when  the  officiating 
priest  in  one  of  the  chief  churches  of  Ferrara  presented  the  cross  for 
the  veneration  of  the  faithful,  one  of  Renee's  choristers,  a  youth  of 
twenty  known  as  Jehannot  or  Zanetto,  broke  out  in  open  blasphemies 
against  whi*t  he  regarded  as  idolatry.  The  incident  was  probably  pre- 
arranged in  order  to  cause  a  popular  outbreak  ;  but  it  is  clear  that  the 
people  were  scandalised.  Under  pressure  from  Rome  Ercole  took  steps 
to  punish  the  offenders.  But  he  found  that  the  whole  suite  of  his 
wife  were  involved  ;  while  Renee  invoked  the  French  power  to  protect 
her  servants.  The  matter  dragged  on  for  some  months  ;  but  at  length, 
as  the  principal  person  implicated  (probably  Calvin  himself)  escaped 
from  his  guards  on  the  road  to  Bologna,  not  without  suspicion  of 
their  connivance,  it  was  allowed  to  drop. 

Henceforwai'd  Calvin  was  Renee's  spiritual  adviser,  and  she  was  in 
frequent  correspondence  with  him.  Under  his  influence  she  refused  in 
1540  to  make  her  confession  or  to  hear  mass  any  longer.  This  does  not 
seem  to  have  involved  an  open  breach  with  the  Church;  there  were  many 
more  who  were  equally  remiss  in  their  religious  duties.  Ercole  tried 
to  avoid  taking  action,  and  winked  at  her  opinions  so  long  as  she  and 
her  associates  avoided  giving  open  scandal.  Moreover,  when  Paul  III 
paid  a  visit  to  Ferrara  Renee  met  him  on  friendly  terms,  and  obtained 
from  him  a  brief,  dated  July  5,  1543,  by  which  she  was  exempted  from 
every  jurisdiction  but  that  of  the  Holy  Office.  But  she  disguised  her 
Calvinism  less  and  less,  while  the  activity  of  the  Inquisition  was  daily 
increasing ;  and  at  length  the  pressure  of  the  Holy  See  compelled  the 
Duke  to  act.     In  1554  he  applied  to  the  French  King  for  an  "  able  and 

C.    M.     H.     II.  25 


386  The  Moclenese  Academy  [io37-48 

energetic  "  teacher  for  his  wife,  and  the  Inquisitor  Mathieu  Ory  was  sent. 
As  his  exhortations  made  no  impression,  she  was  put  on  her  trial  for 
heresy,  and  condemned  to  imprisonment,  twenty-four  of  her  servants 
being  likewise  sentenced.  But  a  week  afterwards,  on  September  13,  it 
was  announced  that  she  had  "abjured  and  received  pardon."  The 
documents  are  lost,  so  that  it  is  hard  to  say  precisely  what  occurred.  It 
is  certain  that  Renee  made  her  confession  and  received  the  Eucharist, 
equally  so  that  she  was  at  heart  a  Calvinist,  and  went  on  in  her  old 
courses  until,  after  Ercole's  death,  she  retired  in  1560  to  Montargis  and 
became  a  protector  of  the  French  Huguenots. 

Ercole's  other  capital,  Modena,  was  equally  famous  as  a  centre  of 
learning.  Many  of  the  scholars  of  the  Modenese  Academy  had  long 
been  suspected  of  heterodoxy,  among  them  being  Lodovico  Castelvetro, 
Gabriele  Falloppio,  the  anatomist,  and  the  brothers  Grillenzone,  who  were 
its  founders.  In  Advent,  1537,  an  Austin  friar,  Serafino  of  Ferrara, 
denounced  an  anonymous  book,  the  Sommario  della  Santa  jScrittura, 
which  was  being  sold  in  Modena  by  the  bookseller  Antonio  Gaboldino ; 
but  his  action  only  called  forth  protests.  In  1540  arrived  the  learned 
Paolo  Ricci,  a  conventual  Franciscan,  who  had  left  the  cloister,  and 
now,  under  the  assumed  name  of  Lisio  Fileno,  publicly  expounded  the 
Scriptures  and  denounced  the  Papac3%  Thus  the  new  opinions  gained 
ground.  The  annalist  Tassoni  (il  Vecchio)  declares  that  both  men  and 
women  disputed  everywhere,  in  the  squares,  in  the  shops,  in  the  churches, 
concerning  the  faith  and  the  law  of  Christ,  quoting  and  misquoting  the 
Scriptures  and  doctors  whom  they  had  never  read. 

Attempts  were  soon  made  to  put  a  stop  to  this.  The  Sommario  was 
refuted  by  Ambrogio  Catarino  and  burned  at  Rome  in  1539.  Two  years 
afterwards  Ricci  was  arrested,  taken  to  Ferrara,  and  made  to  recant. 
Other  measures  were  for  a  time  averted  by  the  intercession  of  Sadoleto, 
himself  a  Modenese  ;  he  urged  that  the  academicians  were  loyal  to  the 
Roman  Church,  and  should  not  be  molested  because  they  claimed  for  the 
learned  the  right  of  free  enquiry.  The  Pope  however  was  still  suspicious; 
and  Giovanni  de  Morone,  the  Bishop  of  Modena,  then  absent  on  a  lega- 
tion in  Germany  and  himself  a  friend  of  Contarini  and  to  the  doctrines 
of  Grace,  was  sent  for  to  reduce  this  "  second  Geneva  "  to  order.  It  was 
proposed  that  suspected  persons  should  sign  a  formulary  of  faith, 
drawn  up  by  Contarini  in  the  plainest  possible  terms.  After  strenuous 
resistance  the  signatures  were  secured,  and  the  matter  seemed  at  an  end. 
But  a  strong  feeling  of  resentment  had  sprung  up  ;  the  Academy  was 
still  a  hot-bed  of  disaffection,  and  preachers  of  doubtful  orthodoxy,  such 
as  Bartolommeo  della  Pergola,  were  eagerly  listened  to. 

At  length  Ercole  was  goaded  into  taking  action  throughout  his 
dominions.  A  ducal  edict  of  May  21,  1546,  was  so  severe  in  its  pro- 
visions that  the  Modenese  Academy  promptly  dispersed ;  and  in  1548 


1550-71]        Repressive  measure  in  the  Modenese  387 

Fra  Girolamo  Papino  of  Lodi  was  installed,  as  Inquisitor  at  Ferrara.  A 
poor  youth  of  Faenza,  by  name  Fannio  (or  Fanino),  was  soon  brought 
before  him,  who  had  fallen  into  heresy  through  his  perverse  interpre- 
tation of  the  Bible.  He  recanted  once  through  fear,  but  relapsed,  and 
began  preaching  throughout  Roraagna  with  great  success.  At  length 
he  was  arrested  at  Bagnacavallo,  and  conveyed  to  Ferrara.  Here  his 
imprisonment  was  a  succession  of  triumphs.  His  friends  were  allowed 
access  to  him,  and  his  visitors  included  Olympia  Morata,  Lavinia  della 
Rovere,  and  others,  upon  whom  his  cheerfulness  and  earnestness  and 
his  bold  predictions  made  a  great  impression.  After  long  negotiations 
between  Ferrara  and  the  Holy  See,  in  which  Renee  herself  took  part,  the 
order  arrived  for  his  execution  as  a  relapsed  heretic.  It  was  confirmed 
by  Ercole,  and  on  August  22, 1550,  he  was  strangled  and  his  body  cast 
into  the  river.  His  was  the  second  recorded  death  for  religion  in  Italy, 
the  first  being  that  of  Jaime  de  Enzinas,  a  Spanish  Lutheran  and, 
according  to  Bucer,  an  eager  disseminator  of  Lutheranism,  who  was 
burned  at  Rome  on  March  16,  1547.  Another  execution  followed  in 
1551,  that  of  a  Sicilian  priest,  Domenico  Giorgio,  who  is  described  as  a 
"  Lutheran  and  heretic."  Minor  punishments  followed  in  great  numbers  ; 
so  that  Renee  was  forced  to  send  her  Huguenot  followers  to  Mirandola, 
where  under  the  Count  Galeotto  Pico  they  found  a  place  of  refuge. 

Some  years  afterwards  attention  was  again  called  to  Modena,  where 
the  Reform  still  prospered.  On  October  1,  1555,  a  brief  of  Paul  IV 
demanded  that  four  of  the  leaders,  Bonifacio  and  Filippo  Valentino  (the 
former  of  whom  was  provost  of  the  Cathedral),  Lodovico  Castelvetro 
(who  had  translated  the  writings  of  Melanchthon  into  Italian),  and  the 
bookseller  Gaboldino,  should  be  arrested  and  handed  over  to  the  Holy 
Office.  Filippo  Valentino  and  Castelvetro,  warned  in  time,  made  their 
escape.  The  others  were  taken  and  conveyed  to  Rome,  where  Bonifacio 
recanted ;  but  Gaboldino,  on  refusing  to  do  so,  was  condemned  to  perpetual 
imprisonment.  Four  years  later  Castelvetro,  already  condemned  for 
contumacy,  was  persuaded  to  go  to  Rome  with  his  brother  Giammaria, 
and  stand  his  trial ;  but  he  fled  before  it  was  over,  was  again  condemned, 
and  was  burned  in  effigy  as  a  contumacious  heretic.  The  two  brothers 
escaped  to  Chiavenna,  where  Lodovico  died  in  1571,  having  in  1561 
appealed  in  vain  for  a  hearing  before  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Even  this  was  not  the  end  of  heresy  in  the  duchy.  The  registers  of 
the  Inquisition  contain  long  lists  of  suspects,  and  not  a  few  condemna- 
tions, both  at  Ferrara  and  Modena  ;  at  Modena  indeed,  in  1568  alone, 
thirteen  men  and  one  woman  perished  at  the  stake. 

Very  different  again  was  the  movement  at  Naples,  at  any  rate  in  its 
earlier  stages.  It  centres  round  one  great  man,  Juan  de  Valdes,  whose 
position  is  thus  described  by  Niccolo  Balbini,  minister  of  the  congrega- 
tion of  Italian  refugees  at  Geneva,  in  his  life  of  Galeazzo  Caracciolo  : 


388  Juan  and  Alfonso  de  Valdes  [i500-32 

"  There  was  at  that  time  in  Naples  a  Spanish  gentleman,  who  having  a 
certain  knowledge  of  evangelical  truth  and  above  all  of  the  doctrine  of 
justification,  had  begun  to  draw  to  the  new  doctrines  certain  noble-born 
persons  with  wliom  he  conversed,  refuting  the  idea  of  justification  by  our 
own  deserving,  and  of  the  merit  of  works,  and  exposing  certain  supersti- 
tions." He  adds  that  the  disciples  of  Valdes  "'  did  not  cease  to  frequent 
the  churches,  to  resort  to  mass  like  other  people,  and  to  share  in  the 
current  idolatry."  This  however  gives  no  idea  of  his  real  greatness. 
Valdes  was  at  once  a  devout  mystic  and  a  born  teacher  ;  and  having 
settled  in  Naples  he  at  once  became  the  leading  spirit  and  the  oracle  of 
a  wide  circle  of  devout  and  cultured  men  and  women  who  submitted 
themselves  wholly  to  his  teaching  and  guidance. 

Born  of  a  noble  family  at  Cuenga  in  new  Castile  (c.  1500),  where  his 
father  Ferrando  was  corregidor,  he  and  his  twin-brother  Alfonso  had 
been  educated  for  the  public  service.  Both  were  early  drawn  into 
sympathy  with  the  protest  against  abuses,  but  whilst  Alfonso  died  an 
"  erasmista,^^  Juan  advanced  far  beyond  this.  Alfonso  entered  the  service 
of  the  Emperor,  and,  though  an  indifferent  Latinist,  gradually  rose  to  be 
first  secretary.  In  this  capacity  he  was  responsible  for  several  imperial 
letters  which  urged  the  necessity  of  reform  in  no  gentle  terms.  But 
these  are  not  our  only  index  to  his  opinions.  He  was  a  close  friend  of 
Erasmus  and  a  student  of  his  writings ;  and  after  the  Sack  of  Rome  in 
1527  he  put  forth  a  Dialogue  between  Lactancio,  an  imperial  courtier, 
and  a  certain  archdeacon,  in  which  he  vindicates  the  Emperor,  and 
declares  the  catastrophe  to  be  a  judgment  upon  the  sins  of  the  Papacy. 
Lactancio  allows  that  Luther  had  fallen  into  many  heresies,  but  very 
pertinently  says  that  if  they  had  remedied  the  things  of  which  he  justly 
complained,  instead  of  excommunicating  him,  he  would  never  have  so 
lapsed.  He  calls  for  a  speedy  Reformation,  that  it  may  be  proclaimed 
to  the  end  of  the  world  how  "  Jesus  Christ  built  the  Church,  and  the 
Emperor  Charles  V  restored  it."  Alfonso  follows  in  the  footsteps  of 
Erasmus  ;  and  the  reader  of  the  Colloquia  will  find  little  that  is  new  here, 
unless  it  be  that  Alfonso  is,  as  a  contemporary  said,  more  Erasmian  than 
Erasmus  himself.  He  was  at  once  attacked,  but  found  many  defenders  ; 
and  Charles  himself  declared  that  though  he  had  not  read  the  book, 
Valdes  was  a  good  Christian,  who  would  not  write  heresies.  Accordingly, 
he  was  not  molested,  and  ended  his  life  in  the  Emperor's  service  early  in 
October,  1532. 

Little  is  known  of  Juan's  early  life,  excepting  that  he  was  for  ten 
years  about  the  Court,  apparently  under  his  brother.  Towards  the  end 
of  this  period,  and  just  after  the  Didlogo  de  Lactancio  was  finished,  Juan 
produced  a  similar  work,  the  Didlogo  de  Mercurio  y  Caron^  in  which 
Mercury  and  Charon  are  made  to  confer  with  the  souls  of  the  departed 
as  to  their  religious  life  and  the  affairs  of  the  world  they  have  just  left. 
It  reall}'  consists  of  two  distinct  dialogues  differing  in  style  and  substance, 


1529-41]  Juan  de  Valdes  at  Xaples  389 

one  being  mainly  political  (showing  signs  of  Alfonso's  co-oj^eration)  and 
the  other  mainly  religious,  although  in  doctrine  it  does  not  go  beyond 
a  condemnation  of  prayers  to  the  Virgin.  But  they  were  joined  in  one, 
and  published  with  the  Lactancio  in  1529.  We  next  hear  of  Juan  in 
1530,  at  Rome,  Avhere  he  presently  became  a  j)apal  chamberlain  under 
Clement  VII,  by  whom,  according  to  Carnesecchi,  he  was  much  beloved. 
He  was  at  Bologna  with  the  Pope  in  Januar}-,  1533,  but  soon  afterwards 
removed  to  Naples,  where  he  remained,  excepting  for  one  visit  to  Rome, 
till  his  death  in  1541. 

At  Naples  he  gave  himself  up  to  study,  to  religious  meditation,  and 
to  the  society  of  his  friends.  Between  April,  1534,  and  September,  1536, 
he  produced  his  JDidlogo  de  la  lengua^  a  valuable  stud}^  of  the  Spanish 
tongue,  and  one  of  the  most  beautiful  writings  of  its  day.  During  the 
next  fewyears  he  wrote  andcirculated  amongsthisfriends,in  manuscript, 
his  CX  Considerationes  (subsequently  translated  into  English  by  Nicho- 
las Fei^rar),  his  Catechism,  Lac  Spirituale,  a  large  number  of  short  trea- 
tises and  commentaries,  and  translations  of  parts  of  the  Bible  from 
the  original  languages.  His  doctrine  as  contained  in  these  Avorks  is 
certainly  not  distinctively  Lutheran  or  Calvinist,  but  that  of  one  whose 
thouglits  turned  ever  inward  rather  than  outward,  a  devout  evangelical 
mystic  who  recommended  frequent  confession  and  communion,  and  had 
no  desire  to  overturn  the  ordinances  of  the  Church.  His  disciples  were 
won  by  himself  rather  than  by  his  doctrines  ;  and  even  the  element  of 
his  teaching  which  others  seized  upon  most  eagerly  —  justification  by  faith 
only  —  was  not  to  him  what  it  was  to  the  Lutheran,  the  corner-stone  of 
his  whole  system.  To  him  it  was  the  expression  of  the  fact  that  only 
by  self-abnegation  could  men  receive  the  divine  illumination,  and  thus 
conform  to  the  image  of  God  in  which  they  were  made.  And  the 
tract  by  means  of  which  this  doctrine  was  most  widely  diffused  in 
Italy,  the  famous  Beneficio  della  morte  di  Cristo,  which  has  been  called 
the  Credo  of  the  Italian  Reformed,  was  not  the  work  of  Valdes  himself, 
but  of  a  disciple,  the  Benedictine  monk  Benedetto  of  Mantua,  who 
wrote  it  in  his  monastery  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Etna,  and  at  whose 
request  Marcantonio  Flaminio  revised  it  and  improved  the  style.  It 
began  to  be  spread  broadcast  in  Italy  about  1540,  at  first  in  manu- 
script and  then  in  print,  and  made  a  deep  impression  wherever  it 
went. 

The  personal  influence  of  Valdes  was  very  great,  both  amongst  those 
who  hacl  known  him  at  the  Court  of  Clement  VII  and  those  who  now 
saw  him  for  the  first  time.  In  his  unprinted  life  of  Paul  IV,  written  early 
in  the  seventeenth  century,  Antonio  Caracciolo  reckons  the  number  of 
Valdes'  adherents  at  over  three  thousand,  of  whom  many  were  leading 
men.  This  is  doubtless  only  a  guess,  but  the  number  was  certainly  large. 
And  since  at  this  very  time,  in  1536,  an  edict  had  gone  forth  in  Naples 
forbidding  all  commerce  with  heretics  on  pain  of  death  and  confiscation, 


390  Folloivers  of  Juan  de  Valdes  [1541-86 

it  is  clear  that  the  many  persons  of  importance  in  Church  and  State  who 
took  part  in  his  conferences  had  no  idea  that  their  action  came  under 
this  ban.  Many,  and  especially  the  Theatines,  regarded  him  with 
suspicion  ;  but  that  was  all. 

He  and  his  two  chief  adherents,  Bernardino  Ochino  and  Pietro 
Martire  Vermigli,  are  styled  by  Antonio  Caracciolo  the  "  Satanic  trium- 
virate." With  them  were  Marcantonio  Flaminio,  Pietro  Carnesecchi, 
Galeazzo  Caraccioli  (nephew  of  Poj^e  Paul  IV),  Benedetto  Cusano, 
Marcantonio  Magno,  Giovanni  MoUio,  the  Franciscan,  Jacopo  Bonfadio, 
the  historian  (burned  at  Genoa,  but  probably  not  for  heresy,  in  1550), 
Vittorio  Soranzo  (afterwards  Bishop  of  Bergamo)  and  LattanzioRagnone 
of  Siena,  all  of  whom  were  subsequently  regarded  as  heretics.  There 
were  also  Pietrantonio  di  Capua,  Archbishop  of  Otranto  (who  attended 
Valdes  on  his  deathbed  and  always  held  him  in  great  reverence),  the 
Archbishops  of  Sorrento  and  Reggio,  the  Bishops  of  Catania,  Nola, 
Policastro,  and  La  Cava  (Giov'anni  Tommaso  Sanfelice,  imprisoned 
by  Paul  IV  for  over  two  years  on  suspicion  of  heresy),  and  Giambattista 
Folengo,  a  learned  monk  of  Monte  Cassino.  With  them,  too,  were  the 
most  noble  and  respected  ladies  of  Naples,  Vittoria  Colonna,  Marchioness 
of  Pescara,  her  kinswoman  Costanza  d'Avalos,  Duchess  of  Amalfi,  Isa- 
bella Manrique  of  Brisegna,  sister-in-law  to  the  Spanish  Inquisitor- 
general  of  that  name,  above  all  Giulia  Gonzaga,  Duchess  of  Traietto  and 
Countess  of  Fondi  in  her  own  right.  On  the  death  of  her  husband  she 
had  retired  to  Fondi,  where  the  fame  of  her  beauty  was  such  that  the  cor- 
sair Khair  Eddin  Barbarossa  attempted  to  kidnap  her  for  the  Sultan. 
She  had  now  taken  up  her  abode  in  the  convent  of  San  Francesco  at 
Naples,  and  was  much  respected  for  her  strict  and  pious  life.  She  sub- 
mitted herself  entirely  to  the  guidance  of  Valdes  ;  and  several  of  his 
treatises  were  written  for  her  benefit. 

After  his  death  most  of  his  followers  dispersed,  and  not  a  few  of 
them  were  afterwards  proceeded  against  in  other  parts  of  Italy.  Those 
who  still  remained  were  led,  according  to  a  contemporary  writer,  by  a 
triumvirate  consisting  of  Donna  Giulia,  a  Benedictine  monk  named 
Germano  Minadois,  and  a  Spaniard,  Sigismundo  Minoz,  who  was  director 
of  the  hospital  for  incurables.  Some  presently  abandoned  the  Roman 
communion.  Galeazzo  Caraccioli,  for  example,  visited  Germany  in  the 
Emperor's  service,  and  learned  that  it  was  not  enough  to  accept  Justifi- 
cation, but  that  he  must  forsake  "  idolatry  "  also.  Failing  to  induce 
even  his  own  family  to  accompany  him,  he  went  alone  to  Geneva  in 
March,  1551,  where  he  was  well  received  by  Calvin,  as  was  Lattanzio 
Ragnone,  who  followed  two  days  later.  He  ventured  into  Italy  more 
than  once,  and  many  efforts  were  made,  especially  after  his  uncle  became 
Pope,  to  recall  him  ;  but  they  all  failed,  and  he  died  at  Geneva  in  1586. 
Isabella  Brisegna  also  fled,  first  to  Zurich  and  then  to  Chiavenna. 
Some,  again,  seem  to  have  abandoned  their  views  owing  to  the  preaching 


1500-76]  Pietro  Martire  Vermigli  391 

of  the  Jesuit  Alfonso  Salmeron  in  1553  and  the  following  years  ;  and 
some,  as  the  Austin  friar  Francesco  Romano,  recanted  under  pressure. 
Others  still  remained  staunch,  under  the  leadership  of  Giulia,  who 
assisted  with  her  means  those  who  fled,  but  refused  to  fly  herself. 
Several  were  proceeded  against  and  put  to  death  ;  and  at  length,  in 
March,  1564,  Gian  Francesco  di  Caserta  and  Giovanni  Bernardino  di 
A  versa  were  beheaded  and  burned  in  the  market-place.  It  is  probable 
that  only  the  death  of  Pius  IV  in  December,  1565,  saved  Giulia  herself 
from  a  like  fate  ;  as  it  was,  she  remained  in  the  convent  till  her  death 
on  April  19,  1566.  With  her  the  party  came  to  an  end.  Meanwhile, 
however,  it  had  spread  elsewhere  :  between  1541  and  1576  there  are 
over  forty  trials  for  Lutheranism  in  the  records  which  still  survive  of 
the  Sicilian  Inquisition,  about  half  of  the  culprits,  who  include  not  a  few 
parish  priests  and  religious,  being  put  to  death.  Other  heresies  had 
arisen  also  ;  the  records  speak,  for  instance,  of  Sacramentaries,  Ana- 
baptists, anti-Trinitarians,  and  those  who  disbelieved  in  a  future  life. 

Lucca  was  the  only  other  place  where  the  movement  assumed 
a  really  popular  form  ;  and  here  it  centres  round  one  man.  Pietro 
Martire  Vermigli,  born  of  well-to-do  parents  at  Florence  in  1500,  had 
joined  the  Austin  canons  at  Fiesole  in  1516,  and  learned  from  them  to 
know  his  Bible  well.  He  studied  Greek  and  Hebrew  at  Padua  and  else- 
where, and  being  appointed  to  preach  was  soon  well  known  throughout 
Italy.  High  honours  fell  to  him  :  he  became  Abbot  of  Spoleto,  and  then 
Prior  of  the  great  house  of  San  Pietro  ad  aram  at  Naples  and  Visitor- 
general  of  his  Order.  Here  he  came  into  contact  with  Valde,  began  to 
read  the  writings  of  Bucer  and  others,  and  lectured  on  the  First  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians.  He  was  accused  of  heresy,  and  for  a  time  forbidden 
to  preach  ;  but  the  prohibition  was  removed  by  the  Pope  at  the  instance 
of  Contarini,  Pole,  and  other  friends.  In  1541  he  left  Naples  and  became 
Prior  of  San  Frediano  at  Lucca.  This  was  his  opportunity,  for  the  Prior 
had  quasi-episcopal  rights  over  half  the  city.  He  gathered  about  him 
a  body  of  like-minded  scholars,  and  with  them  set  up  a  scheme  of  study 
which  was  shared  by  many  of  the  chief  citizens  and  nobles.  He  himself 
expounded  St  Paul's  Epistles  and  the  Psalms.  Latin  was  taught  by 
Paolo  Lacizi  of  Verona, a  canon  of  the  Lateran  and  afterwards  Vermigli's 
colleague  at  Strassburg  ;  Greek  by  Count  MassimilianoCelso  Martinengo, 
also  a  canon  of  the  Lateran  and  subsequently  pastor  of  the  Italian 
congregation  at  Geneva  ;  and  Hebrew  by  Emanuele  Tremelli  of  Ferrara, 
a  Jew  converted  by  Pole  and  Flaminio,  who  afterwards  came  to  England. 
With  them  also  were  Francesco  Robortello  and  Celio  Secondo  Curione, 
public  professors  of  letters,  and  Girolamo  Zanchi,  afterwards  professor 
of  theology  at  Strassburg.  Vermigli  himself  preached  every  Sunday  to 
congregations  which  grew  continually  ;  and  no  small  part  of  the  city 
listened  readily  when  he  told  them  to  regard  the  Eucharist  as  a  mere 


392  Bernardino  Ochino  [1534-51 

remembrance  of  the  Passion.  This  soon  became  known  beyond  the 
walls  of  Lucca.  Vermigli  was  summoned  to  the  Chapter  of  his  Order  at 
Genoa,  and  the  magistrates  of  Lucca  received  a  papal  injunction  to 
arrest  all  heretical  teachers  and  send  them  to  Rome.  An  Austin  friar 
was  taken,  released  by  the  nobles,  and  recaptured  ;  and  Yermigli,  never 
a  man  of  much  courage,  resolved  on  flight.  In  August,  1542,  he  set  out 
for  Pisa  with  two  companions  ;  and  "  in  that  city,  with  certain  noble 
persons,  he  celebrated  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  with  the  Christian  rite." 
Thence  he  wrote  to  Pole  and  to  the  people  of  Lucca,  giving  as  reasons 
for  his  flight  the  errors  and  abuses  of  the  pontifical  religion  and  the 
hatred  of  his  enemies  ;  after  which  he  went  to  Switzerland  by  way  of 
Bologna  and  Ferrara,  and  on  to  Strassburg.  He  subsequently  came  to 
England  and  was  made  professor  of  divinity  at  Oxford,  but  returned  to 
Strassburg  in  1553,  and  died  at  Zurich  in  1562.  It  appears  that  no 
fewer  than  eighteen  canons  of  his  house  left  Lucca  within  a  year,  and 
escaped  beyond  the  Alps.  But  although  the  shepherds  had  fled,  the 
flock  did  not  at  once  melt  away.  They  were  in  a  measure  supported  by 
the  senate,  which  took  measures  at  length  to  stamp  out  the  heresy, 
but  only  under  pressure,  and  as  an  alternative  to  the  setting  up  of  the 
Roman  Inquisition.  In  1545  the  senate  issued  an  edict  against  the 
"rash  persons  of  both  sexes  who  without  any  knowledge  of  Holy  Scripture 
or  the  sacred  canons  dare  to  discuss  things  concerning  the  Christian 
faith  as  though  they  were  great  theologians  "  ;  and  by  1551  the  last 
Lucchese  Reformers  were   compelled  to  fly. 

We  now  turn  to  leaders  of  the  movement  who  were  not  connected 
with  any  particular  centre.  One  who  was  even  better  known  fled  at 
the  same  time  with  Vermigli,  namely  Bernardino  Ochino,  of  Siena. 
When  young  he  had  joined  the  Friars  Observant,  and  rose  to  be  their 
Provincial  ;  but  in  1534  he  left  them  for  the  Capuchins,  a  stricter 
body  founded  some  six  years  before,  by  whom  in  1538  he  was  chosen 
Vicar-general.  Meanwhile  he  had  begun  to  preach,  was  appointed  an 
"  apostolic  missionary,"  and  was  soon  recognised  as  the  foremost  preacher 
of  the  day.  His  extant  sermons  hardly  account  for  his  fame  ;  but 
preaching  was  at  a  low  ebb,  and  the  strictness  of  his  life  added  greatly 
to  the  effect  of  his  fiery  eloquence.  At  Naples  he  became  a  follower  of 
Valdes,  as  did  others  of  his  Order  ;  including,  as  he  afterwards  said, 
most  of  the  preachers.  At  Florence  he  visited  Caterina  Cibo  ;  and  his 
conversations  with  her,  put  into  the  shape  of  Sette  DialogM  in  1539, 
afford  clear  evidence  that  he  had  already  rejected  much  of  the  current 
theology.  So  far,  however,  he  cannot  have  incurred  serious  suspicion  ; 
for  although  his  preaching  was  impugned  at  Naples  in  1536  and  1539, 
he  was  re-elected  Vicar-general  in  1541.  The  following  year  came  the 
catastrophe.  He  was  twice  cited  before  the  Nuncio  at  Venice  for  his 
sermons,  and  the  second  time  he  was  forbidden  to  preach  any  more,  and 


1542-1604]  Italian  Reformers  in  Switzerland  and  Poland  393 

went  to  Verona.  Whilst  living  there,  in  frequent  intercourse  with  the 
venerable  Bishop  Giberti,  he  received  a  citation  to  appear  before  the 
newly-founded  Roman  Inquisition.  H>e  set  out  in  August,  and  on  his 
way  through  Bologna  paid  a  visit  to  Contarini,  who  lay  dying  there. 
The  accounts  of  their  interview  differ ;  but  Ochino  gathered  that  if  he 
went  to  Rome  he  would  be  forced  "to  deny  Christ  or  be  crucified."  At 
Florence  he  met  Vermigli,  and  resolved  forthwith  to  fly,  to  throw  in  his 
lot  with  the  Swiss  Reformers,  and  to  disseminate  his  doctrine  by  his  pen. 
He  reached  Geneva,  being  then  at  the  age  of  fift3'-five,  passing  after- 
wards to  Zurich,  Augsburg,  England,  and  back  to  Zurich.  But  his 
restless  mind  could  not  easily  find  satisfaction.  Before  long  the  Swiss 
expelled  him  because  of  his  views  on  marriage,  and  he  began  to  turn  to 
the  party  amongst  his  compatriots  which  had  abandoned  not  only  the 
historic  system  but  the  historic  faith  of  the  Church.  As  early  as 
September,  1550,  a  secret  Anabaptist  meeting  had  been  held  at  Venice, 
attended  by  60  deputies,  which  had  rejected  the  diAdnity  of  Christ. 
Mau}^  who  shared  these  views  had  taken  refuge  amongst  the  Swiss, 
including  Giorgio  Blandrata,  formerly  physician  to  Sigismund  I  of 
Poland,  Niccolo  Gallo,  Giovanni  Paolo  Alciati,  Matteo  Gribaldi,  and 
Valentino  Gentile,  all  of  whom  fled  to  Geneva,  and  Lelio  Sozzini,  who 
went  to  Basel  in  1547  and  lived  there  unsuspected  till  his  death  in  1562. 
Calvin  at  length  grew  suspicious,  and  on  May  18,  1558,  put  forth  a 
confession  of  faith  to  be  signed  by  all  the  members  of  the  Italian 
congregation  as  a  test  of  orthodoxy.  Gribaldi  managed  to  clear  him- 
self ;  Blandrata  and  Alciati,  finding  themselves  unable  to  do  so,  fled  to 
Poland ;  Gallo  and  Gentile  signed,  but  afterwards  retracted  and  were 
proceeded  against  for  heresy  :  the  last-named  was  ultimately  beheaded 
at  Bern,  in  1556,  as  a  perjured  heretic.  After  1558,  Poland  and 
Transylvania  became  the  headquarters  of  this  extreme  school,  which 
remained  the  prey  of  vague  and  mutually  contradictory  theories,  Arian 
and  Anabaptist,  until  Fausto  Sozzini  (1539-1604),  the  nephew  of  Lelio, 
came  to  Transylvania  (1578)  and  little  by  little  organized  a  definite 
"  Unitarian  Church,"  the  doctrinal  manual  of  which  was  the  Rakovian 
Catechism.  To  this  party,  in  its  earlier  stages,  Ochino  had  made 
approaches  (in  his  Dialogi  published  in  1563  in  Poland)  ;  but  even  the 
Polish  anti-trinitarians  thought  him  unsound ;  and  he  died  in  1564, 
forsaken  and  alone,  at  Schlackau  in  Moravia. 

Ochino's  flight  made  a  great  sensation.  To  Caraffa  it  suggested  the 
fall  of  Lucifer.  Some  attributed  it  to  disappointed  ambition,  some  to 
a  sudden  temptation.  Vittoria  Colonna,  hitherto  a  frequent  correspon- 
dent, broke  with  him  entirely ;  but  Caterina  Cibo,  in  whose  house  he  had 
renounced  the  cowl,  appears  to  have  corresponded  with  him  still.  In  the 
records  of  the  Roman  Inquisition  she  figures  as  doctrix  moiiiallum  haeretic- 
arum,  the  nuns  being  those  of  St  Martha  outside  Florence.  But  she  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  proceeded  against,  and  died  at  Florence  in  1555. 


394  Pierpaolo  Vergerio  [1533-48 

Another  man  of  mark  who  left  the  Roman  communion  was  Pier- 
paolo Vergerio  of  Capo  d'  Istria.  He  had  been  a  lawyer  in  Venice, 
entered  the  service  of  the  Nuncio  at  the  instance  of  his  brother  Aurelio, 
who  was  secretary  to  Clement  VII,  and  soon  rose  to  importance.  He 
went  to  Rome  early  in  1533,  and  was  sent  as  Nuncio  to  Ferdinand  of 
Austria.  Two  years  later  he  went  to  invite  the  German  Princes  to  the 
Council  of  Mantua,  and  had  a  memorable  interview  with  Luther,  whom 
he  describes  with  characteristic  bitterness.  In  1536  he  received  the 
bishopric  of  Modrusch,  exchanged  soon  after  for  that  of  Capo  d'  Istria ; 
all  the  orders  being  conferred  upon  him  in  one  day  by  his  brother 
Giambattista,  Bishop  of  Pola,  who  at  the  time  of  his  death  was  suspected 
of  heresy,  and  not  without  reason.  Pierpaolo  was  still  a  restless  and 
energetic  papal  agent,  distrusted  by  many,  and  scheming  both  for 
practical  reform  and  for  his  own  aggrandisement.  In  time  a  change 
came  over  him.  During  a  mission  to  France  he  met,  and  was  profoundly 
impressed  by,  Margaret  of  Navarre.  Passing  into  Germany,  he  consorted 
much  with  Melanchthon  and  others.  At  the  Diet  of  Worms  (1540) 
he  made  an  oration  De  imitate  et  pace  ecclesiae,  in  which  he  urged  the 
necessity  for  a  General  Council  for  the  reform  of  the  Church.  He 
allowed  that  there  were  grave  abuses  in  the  Church,  but  not  that 
they  were  any  reason  for  secession ;  he  pointed  to  the  quarrels  amongst 
the  Reformed,  and  urged  them  to  return  to  "  the  Body  of  Christ,  who  is 
our  consolation  and  our  peace."  His  survey  of  the  facts  is  somewhat 
superficial,  but  a  new  tone  of  charity  and  earnestness  runs  through 
it.  He  returned  to  Capo  d'  Istri  to  take  care  of  "  the  little  vineyard 
which  God  had  committed  to  him " ;  he  visited  diligently,  preached 
evangelical  doctrine,  and  reformed  practical  abuses.  He  read  heretical 
books  in  order  to  confute  them ;  but  they  only  raised  doubts  in  his  own 
mind.  Suspicion  arose  on  all  sides.  Late  in  1514  the  monks  of  his 
diocese,  irritated  by  his  strictness,  accused  him  to  the  Venetian  Inqui- 
sition, which  began  a  process  against  him.  It  was  still  continuing 
when  the  Council  of  Trent  was  opened.  In  February,  1546,  he  went  to 
the  Council  and  offered  his  defence;  but,  although  the  Cardinal  of 
Mantua  warned  them  not  to  drive  a  good  Bishop  to  desperation,  they 
would  not  hear  him  or  allow  him  to  take  his  seat,  and  forbade  his 
return  to  his  diocese.  Then  he  asked  for  a  canonical  trial  from  his 
fellow-Bishops,  but  in  vain.     After  this  he  lost  all  heart. 

The  last  straw  was  the  case  of  Francesco  Spiera,  a  lawyer  of  Citta- 
della,  whose  story  was  long  remembered  amongst  the  Reformed.  He  had 
incurred  suspicion  by  associating  with  Speziale  and  translating  the 
Lord's  Prayer  into  Italian.  Being  cited  by  the  Inquisition  in  1548,  he 
abjured  from  fear,  and  repeated  his  abjuration  the  following  Sunday  at 
Cittadella,  against  his  conscience.  Presently,  he  fell  grievously  ill,  and  lay 
for  months  under  the  conviction  that  he  had  committed  the  unpardonable 
sin  by  his  apostasy.     In  vain  his  friends  spoke  of  God's  mercy  ;    he  met 


1542-53]  Sympathy  with  Reform  395 

their  exhortations  with  a  hoplessness  which  was  the  more  terrible 
because  it  was  so  cahii,  though  broken  occasionally  by  paroxysms  of 
frenzy.  From  the  investigation  made  by  the  Inquisition  after  his  death 
it  seems  likely  that  some  rays  of  hope  dawned  upon  him  towards  the 
end  ;  but  this  was  unknown  to  the  many  who  came  to  see  him,  and  awe 
and  consternation  prevailed  amongst  them.  To  Vergerio,  who  watched 
often  at  his  bedside,  the  warning  seemed  to  be  one  which  he  dared  not 
neglect  ;  he  resolved  to  secede  at  once,  and  on  December  13,  1548,  he 
sent  his  resolve,  with  an  account  of  the  dying  Spiera,  to  Rota,  the 
Bishop  Suffragan  of  Padua.  His  deposition  and  excommunication 
followed  on  July  3,  1549.  He  fled  to  the  Grisons,  and  for  a  time 
worked  at  Poschiavo  ;  in  1553  he  passed  to  Wiirttemberg,  where  he 
remained  till  his  death.  He  translated  parts  of  the  Bible  into  Slavonic, 
and  wrote  fiery  tracts  against  the  Papacy ;  but  to  all  he  appeared  a 
schemer  and  a  disappointed  man  :  Calvin  speaks  of  him  as  a  "  restless 
busybody,"  and  Jewel  calls  him  a  "crafty  knave." 

We  return  now  to  those  who  sympathised  more  or  less  with  the  new 
views  but  did  not  separate  from  the  Church.  They  were  of  very  different 
types.  Some,  like  Michelangelo  Buonarotti,  were  simply  men  of  that 
evangelical  spirit  which  easily  comes  under  suspicion  when  undue  stress 
is  being  laid  on  externals  ;  others,  like  Falloppio,  were  bold  thinkers  who 
overstepped  the  limits  of  medievalism  ;  others,  like  Giangiorgio  Trissino, 
a  fugitive  for  seventeen  years  who  died  in  the  prisons  of  the  Inquisition, 
directed  their  satire  against  the  Papacy  only ;  others  really  adopted  the 
Reformed  views,  like  the  satiric  poet  Francesco  Berni,  whose  Orlando 
Innamorato  appears  to  have  been  manipulated  after  his  death  to  disguise 
the  Lutheran  flavour.  A  better  representative  of  these  last  is  Aonio 
Paleario  of  Veroli,  a  man  of  querulous  temper  but  devoutly  Christian 
life,  at  once  a  humanist  and  a  doctrinal  Reformer.  So  early  as  1542  he 
was  accused  of  heresy  at  Siena,  partly  owing  to  a  dispute  with  a  preacher 
at  Colle,  partly  on  account  of  his  book  Bella  pienezza,  sofficenza,  e 
satisfazione  della  passione  di  Cristo.  But  he  had  friends,  and  the  trial 
was  stopped  without  his  having  to  read  an  oration  which  he  had  prepared 
in  his  own  defence.  He  continued  to  write  boldly,  and  to  correspond 
with  the  German  and  Swiss  Reformers.  In  1542  or  1543  he  unfolded 
to  them  an  extraordinary  plan  for  a  Council  to  settle  the  religious 
disputes  of  the  day  :  all  the  princes  of  Europe  were  to  choose  holy  men, 
"  entirely  free  from  the  suspicion  of  papal  corruption,"  to  the  number  of 
six  or  seven  from  each  country  ;  and  these  men,  having  been  consecrated 
for  the  purpose  by  twelve  Bishops,  chosen  out  of  their  whole  number  by 
the  Pope  and  the  hierarchy  on  account  of  their  holiness  of  life,  were  to 
act  as  arbiters  and  umpires,  after  hearing  the  matters  in  dispute  fully 
discussed  in  a  perfectly  free  assembly.  Paleario  became  professor  of 
belles-lettres  at  Lucca  in  1546,  on  the  nomination  of  Sadoleto  and  Bembo, 


396  Pahario  and  Carnesecclii  [1508-70 

and  in  1555  he  went  to  fill  a  like  office  at  Milan.  Here  he  was  twice 
proceeded  against  ;  in  1559  nnsuccessfullj  in  the  matter  of  Purgatory, 
on  the  accusation  of  his  former  oj^ponent ;  and  again  in  1567,  when 
the  trial  was  interrupted  by  a  summons  to  appear  at  Rome  before 
the  Holy  Office  itself.  He  pleaded  his  age,  but  ultimately  went  and 
stood  his  trial.  His  answers  on  many  points  were  unsatisfactory  ;  but 
the  real  ground  of  his  condemnation  was  his  steady  assertion  that  it 
was  unlawful  for  the  Pope  to  kill  heretics,  and  that,  so  doing,  he  could 
not  be  the  vicar  of  Christ.  He  was  called  upon  to  make  a  set  abjuration, 
but  refused  (June  14,  1570)  ;  he  was  condemned  as  impenitent  in  the 
presence  of  the  Pope  himself  (June  30)  ;  and  on  July  3  he  was  strangled 
and  burnt  in  the  Piazza  del  Castello.  The  records  of  the  Misericordia 
say  that  he  died  penitent.  It  is  probable  that  this  refers  to  a  general 
statement  of  penitence,  by  means  of  which,  with  the  connivance  of  the 
authorities,  the  punishment  of  burning  alive  was  frequently  avoided. 
In  any  case,  Aonio  died  a  martyr  not  so  much  for  his  particular  opinions 
as  in  the  cause  of  liberty  of  thought  itself. 

Another  who  paid  the  last  penalty  was  Pietro  Carnesecclii.  Born 
in  1508  of  a  noble  Florentine  family,  he  was  educated  in  the  house  of 
Cardinal  Dovizzi  at  Rome,  and  entered  the  papal  service.  Under 
Clement  VII  he  became  protonotary  apostolic,  receiving  also  many  rich 
benefices  and  a  promise  of  the  cardinalate  :  so  great  indeed  was  his 
influence  that  it  used  to  be  said  that  he  was  Pope  rather  than  Clement. 
But  the  death  of  his  master  removed  him  from  a  post  which  was  not 
really  congenial,  and  he  retired  into  secular  life.  A  visit  to  Giulia 
Gonzaga  in  1540  brought  him  into  contact  again  with  Valdes,  whom  he 
had  known  at  the  papal  Court.  He  now  took  him  as  his  spiritual  teacher, 
and  ever  afterwards  regarded  this  as  the  crisis  of  his  life.  From  this  point 
his  history  is  recorded  in  the  details  of  the  process  instituted  against  him 
by  the  Roman  Inquisition.  After  some  years  of  reading  heretical  books 
and  conferring  with  heretics  at  Venice,  he  was  cited  to  Rome  (1546)  and 
put  on  his  trial  for  heresy.  He  denied  everything,  and  "  fraudulently 
extorted  absolution  from  the  Pope."  After  a  visit  to  France,  where  he 
met  many  of  the  Reformers,  he  returned  to  Venice  (1552  c),  and  there 
published  some  of  the  works  of  Valdes.  In  1557  a  new  process  was 
commenced  against  him  ;  he  hid  himself,  and  sentence  was  pronounced 
upon  him  as  a  refractory  heretic.  Even  this  was  not  final.  On  the 
death  of  Paul  IV  (1559),  the  people  joyously  broke  open  the  prisons 
of  the  Inquisition,  destroyed  the  records,  and  suffered  the  prisoners 
(seventy-two  "  heresiarchs,  or  rather  infernal  fiends,"  says  Antonio 
Caracciolo)  to  escape.  Carnesecchi  saw  his  chance  and  seized  it.  His 
sovereign,  Duke  Cosimo  I,  whom  he  had  served  as  an  envoy  and 
councillor  of  State,  took  his  part ;  the  charges  against  him  were  no  longer 
in  existence  ;  the  new  Pope  was  anxious  to  relax  the  severity  of  his 
predecessor  ;  and  thus,  in  May,  1561,  he  was  declared  innocent.    After 


1566-7]  The  Catholic  reformers  397 

this  he  resided  at  liome,  at  Naples,  at  Florence,  always  in  correspondence 
with  heretics,  and  for  a  time  with  a  strong  Calvinistic  bias,  though 
later  his  sympathies  were  Lutheran.  The  accession  of  the  stern  old 
Inquisitor  Ghislieri  as  Pope  Pius  V  again  brought  Carnesecchi  into  danger. 
Cosirao  consented  to  give  him  up  (being  rewarded  two  years  afterwards 
with  the  title  of  Grand  Duke)  ;  and  on  July  4,  1566,  he  was  in  prison 
in  Rome.  The  trial  was  a  lengthy  one  ;  he  fought  hard  for  his  life, 
endeavouring,  as  was  his  wont,  to  resist  force  by  cunning.  But  it  could 
have  only  one  end.  On  September  21,  1567,  he  was  handed  over  to 
the  secular  arm,  and  on  October  21,  with  a  friar  Giulio  Maresio,  he  was 
beheaded  and  burnt. 

But  the  great  process  against  Carnesecchi  had  an  importance  apart 
from  the  man  himself  :  as  it  has  been  said,  he  is  but  the  secondary  figure 
in  it,  and  its  real  heroes  are  the  illustrious  dead.  Carnesecchi  was  the 
disciple  of  Valdes,  the  friend  of  Flaminio  and  Pole  ;  he  had  been  on 
terms  of  intimacy  with  that  body  of  loyal  sons  and  daughters  of  the 
Church  of  whom  mention  has  been  made  already,  who  had  striven  nobly, 
through  evil  report  and  good  report,  for  its  reformation,  and  who  had 
been  hopelessly  beaten  at  the  Council  of  Trent.  They  had  been  watched 
and  suspected  by  the  Inquisition  ever  since  ;  some  indeed  had  actually 
suffered  at  its  hands.  Most  of  them  were  dead  before  1566  ;  but  the 
pursuit  of  heresy  ceased  not  at  the  grave,  and  those  who  during  their 
lives  were  revered  as  the  hope  of  the  Church  were  impugned  as  suspectsor 
as  actual  heretics  in  the  famous  process  of  Carnesecchi.  This  Catholic 
minority,  for  such  it  really  was,  grew  out  of  the  body  of  friends  who 
centred  round  Contarini  in  Venice  ;  it  was  reinforced  by  many  who  had 
sat  at  the  feet  of  Valdes,  or  who  had  travelled  in  the  north.  The  aim 
of  this  party  was  the  reform  of  the  whole  ecclesiastical  system  ;  its 
doctrinal  rallying-point  was  justification  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus  and 
not  by  a  man's  own  works.  So  far  they  were  at  one  with  Luther. 
But,  realising  as  they  did  that  this  had  ever  been  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church,  they  were  not  impelled,  as  he  was,  to  deny  the  reality  of  free 
will,  to  depreciate  the  fruits  of  faith,  or  to  eviscerate  faith  itself  by 
reducing  it  to  an  act  of  intellectual  assent,  and  divorcing  it  from 
Christian  love  which  issues  in  action.  "  We  obtain  this  blessing  of 
complete  and  perpetual  salvation,"  wrote  Sadoleto  to  the  citizens  of 
Geneva,  "  by  faith  alone  in  God  and  in  Jesus  Christ.  When  I  say 
faith  alone,  I  do  not  mean,  as  those  inventors  of  novelties  do,  a  mere 
credulity  and  confidence  in  God,  to  the  exclusion  of  love  and  other 
Christian  virtues.  This  indeed  is  necessary,  and  forms  the  first  access 
which  we  have  to  God  ;  but  it  is  not  enough.  For  we  must  also 
bring  a  mind  full  of  piety  towards  Almighty  God,  and  desirous  of 
performing  whatever  is  agreeable  to  Him,  by  the  power  of  the 
Holy    Spirit."       Moreover,  loyalty  to  the    Church  was  with  them  a 


398  Sadoleto,  Contarini,  and  Pole  [io4i-9 

fundamental  principle.  Many  no  doubt  were  in  frequent  and  friendly 
correspondence  with  the  Reformers  ;  but  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that 
the  line  of  division  between  the  Protestant  bodies  and  the  Church  was 
very  gradually  determined,  and  that  men  long  hoped  for  a  speedy  settle- 
ment of  the  existing  divisions.  Here  again  Sadoleto's  letter  illustrates 
their  position.  He  recognises  the  existing  evils  in  the  Church,  and  will 
even  grant  that  there  are  serious  doctrinal  errors  ;  but  even  so,  the  evils 
of  separation  are  greater  ;  and  to  depart  from  the  unity  of  the  body  of 
Christ  is  to  court  destruction.  "  Let  us  enquire  and  see  which  of  the 
two  is  more  conducive  to  our  advantage,  which  is  better  in  itself,  and 
better  fitted  to  obtain  the  favour  of  Almighty  God  :  whether  to  accord 
with  the  whole  Church,  and  faithfully  observe  her  decrees  and  laws  and 
sacraments,  or  to  adhere  to  men  seeking  dissension  and  novelty.  This, 
dearest  brethren,  is  the  place  where  the  road  divides  :  one  way  leads  to 
life,  the  other  to  everlasting  death."  The  letter  is  worthy  of  its  occasion: 
so  is  the  answer  which  it  called  forth  from  Calvin. 

The  failure  of  the  Consilium  de  emendanda  Ecdesia,  the  death  of 
Clement  VH,  and  the  secession  of  Caraffa,  had  dashed  the  reformers' 
hopes  ;  but  they  did  not  lose  heart.  Contarini  was  still  their  leader  ;  and 
it  was  probably  on  this  account  that  he  was  sent  as  papal  legate  to  the 
Colloquy  of  Ratisbon  in  1541,  whence  he  kept  up  a  correspondence 
with  Pole,  Morone,  and  Foscarari,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Modena.  For 
a  time  all  went  well,  and  an  agreement  was  come  to,  not  indeed  without 
great  difficulty,  upon  the  point  of  Justification.  But  neither  side  really 
trusted  the  other  ;  and  Contarini  himself  was  jealously  suspected  by 
many  members  of  the  Curia.  Consequently,  the  effort  (the  last  real 
effort  to  conciliate  the  reformers)  came  to  nothing  ;  Contarini  returned 
in  deep  sadness  to  Italy,  and  died  the  year  after  at  Bologna.  His 
place  as  leader  of  the  movement  was  taken  by  Reginald  Pole,  whose 
house  at  Viterbo,  whither  he  went  as  papal  governor  in  1541,  became 
their  headquarters.  Here  met  together  for  prayer  and  study  Giberti  and 
Soranzo,  the  former  bishop  of  Verona,  the  latter  before  long  of  Bergamo, 
Flaminio,  Luigi  Priuli,  Donato  Rullo,  Lodovico  Beccatello,  and  others. 
It  was  probably  Pole's  influence  which  kept  Flaminio  from  seceding  to 
the  Lutherans.  Not  less  was  his  influence  with  Vittoria  Colonna,  to 
whom  he  was  greatly  devoted,  and  who  found  in  him  a  wise  spiritual 
guide  when  many  others  seemed  to  have  gone  astray.  It  was  he  who 
advised  her  to  believe  that  we  are  justified  by  faith  only,  and  to  act  as 
though  we  were  to  be  justified  by  our  works. 

Little  by  little  their  hopes  faded.  At  the  Council  of  Trent,  indeed, 
Pole  was  one  of  the  Legates,  and  there  were  not  a  few  Bishops  and 
theologians  who  were  with  him  in  the  matter  of  Justification.  But 
it  soon  became  clear  that  the  Council  and  Curia  were  against  him,  and 
Pole  left  Trent  before  the  decree  on  the  subject  was  actually  made.  He 
relapsed  into  silence,  waiting,  and  advising  his  friends  to  wait,  for  a  more 


1549-59]  The  Reform  in  Spain  399 

convenient  season.  It  seemed  as  if  this  had  actually  come  when,  in 
November,  1549,  Paul  III  died.  The  English  Cardinal  was  beloved  by 
some,  respected  by  all.  In  the  Conclave  which  followed  it  long  appeared 
likely  that  he  would  be  chosen  ;  and  the  betting  outside,  based  upon 
information  from  within,  was  much  in  his  favour.  But  his  views  on 
Justification  robbed  him  of  the  tiara.  His  rival  del  Monte  w^as  chosen, 
who  took  the  name  of  Julius  III  ;  and  Pole  once  more  went  into 
retirement  until  his  mission  to  England  in  1554.  The  accession  of 
his  enemy  Caraffa  as  Paul  IV  was  a  still  greater  blow.  Sadoleto's 
commentary  on  the  Romans  and  Contarini's  book  on  Justification 
were  declared  suspect  ;  Pole  ceased  to  be  Legate  and  was  for  a  time 
disgraced  ;  Morone  was  actually  imprisoned  for  heresy,  and  remained 
in  prison  until  the  death  of  the  Pope  in  1559.  The  Inquisition  resumed 
its  activity  all  over  Italy.  Although  the  total  extinction  of  heresy  was 
still  long  delayed,  the  end  was  only  a  question  of  time.  For  the  springs 
were  dried  up,  and  no  new  ones  burst  forth. 


II 

SPAII^" 

Although  one  of  the  noblest  leaders  of  the  Italian  Reform  was  a 
Spaniard,  the  movement  never  obtained  such  a  hold  upon  Spain  as  upon 
Italy :  in  part  because  measures  of  repression  were  more  promptly  and  more 
thoroughly  applied  —  in  part,  perhaps,  because  many  of  the  practical  abuses 
had  already  been  abated  or  removed,  while  the  doctrinal  abuses  which 
called  forth  the  protest  had  not  yet  prevailed  in  Spain  so  largely  as 
elsewhere.  Many  of  the  best-known  Spanish  Reformers  lived  and  died 
in  Flanders  or  in  some  other  foreign  land  ;  and  in  Spain  itself  the 
movement  appears  to  have  had  little  vitality  excepting  in  and  about 
two  centres,  Valladolid  and  Seville.  Two  autos-de-fe  at  Valladolid  and 
two  at  Seville,  of  the  thorough  kind  instituted  by  the  Spanish  Inquisition, 
sufficed  to  break  up  the  Reformed  in  these  centres.  Many  fugitives 
escaped  and  found  refuge  in  Germany,  England,  or  the  Low  Countries  ; 
and  the  few  who  remained  were  gradually  swept  away  by  the  same 
drastic  methods  of  the  Inquisition. 

A  reform  of  the  Spanish  clergy,  regular  and  secular,  had  taken  place 
before  Luther  arose.  It  had  begun,  so  far  as  the  regulars  were  con- 
cerned, nearly  a  century  before  ;  for  example,  the  Cistercians  had  been 
reformed  by  Fray  Martino  de  Vargas  in  the  time  of  Pope  Eugenius  IV, 
and  afterwards  Cardinal  Mendoza  had  worked  in  the  same  direction.  But 
the  chief  agent  in  it  was  Fray  Ximenez  de  Cisneros  of  the  Order  of 
St  Francis,  to  be  better  known  as  Cardinal  Ximenez.  At  the  request  of 
Ferdinand  and  Isabella  he  drew  up  a  report  on  the  state  of  all  the 


400  Reforms  of  the  Orders  and  the  clergy     [1494-1520 

monasteries  of  Spain.  Thereupon  a  Bull  was  sought  from  Alexander  VI 
in  1494,  by  which  Cisneros  was  empowered  to  visit  and  set  in  order  all 
the  regulars  of  Spain  ;  and  he  inaugurated  the  most  drastic  reformation, 
perhaps,  that  Religious  Houses  ever  sustained.  His  action  was  in  general 
submitted  to  ;  but  his  own  Order,  which  was  the  worst  of  all,  resisted 
strenuously,  and  obtained  a  Bull  of  prohibition  against  him.  On  further 
information  the  Pope  annulled  this,  and  the  work  went  on.  The 
monasteries  were  disciplined,  their  "  privileges  "  burned,  and  their  rents 
and  heritages  taken  away  and  given  to  parishes,  hospitals,  &c.  A  large 
number  of  monks  who  were  scandalous  evil-livers,  and  who  seemed 
irreformable,  were  deported  to  Morocco,  and  the  work  was  complete. 
With  the  seculars  Cisneros  was  less  successful.  But  by  degrees  the 
regulars  reacted  healthfully  upon  them  ;  Bishops  and  provincial  synods 
took  them  in  hand ;  and  the  earlier  Inquisitors,  especially  Adrian  of 
Utrecht,  did  much  to  put  away  abuses  amongst  them.  Without  doubt, 
therefore,  the  moral  state  of  the  Spanish  clergy  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
especially  that  of  the  monks  and  friars,  was  immeasurably  superior  to 
that  of  the  clergy  in  any  other  part  of  Western  Christendom. 

Moreover,  the  purging  of  the  Spanish  clergy  had  been  accompanied, 
or  followed,  by  a  revival  of  learning.  Ximenez  was  a  scholar  and  a 
munificent  patron  of  scholarship  ;  and  under  his  fostering  care  the 
University  of  Alcala  had  become  famous  throughout  Europe  as  a  centre 
of  theological  and  humane  learning.  The  Cretan  Demetrios  Ducas 
taught  Greek  ;  Alfonso  de  Zamora,  Pablo  Coronel,  and  Alfonso  de  Alcala 
were  expert  Hebraists  ;  and  amongst  other  scholars  there  were  the 
two  Vergaras,  Lorenzo  Balbo,  and  Alfonso  de  Nebrija.  The  greatest 
monument  of  the  liberality  and  enterprise  of  Ximenez  was  the  famous 
Complutensian  Polyglott,  which  was  in  preparation  at  the  very  time 
when  Erasmus  was  working  at  the  first  edition  of  his  Greek  Testament, 
though  it  did  not  begin  to  appear  till  1520. 

These  facts  have  no  little  bearing  upon  the  way  in  which  the  writings 
of  Erasmus  were  received  in  Spain.  To  some  he  was  a  literary  colleague 
whom  they  with  all  the  world  were  proud  to  honour  :  to  others  he  was  a 
rival,  whose  work  was  to  be  depreciated  wherever  possible.  Nor  was  it 
difficult  to  do  this  ;  for  his  satirical  writings  against  clerical  abuses  really 
did  not  apply  to  Spain.  Elsewhere,  all  good  men  were  agreed  in  com- 
bating the  evils  against  which  he  wrote.  In  Spain,  the  earnestness  of 
his  crusade  was  easily  overlooked  by  those  who  had  not  lived  abroad ;  on 
the  other  hand,  nowhere  was  there  so  keen  a  scent  for  heresy.  His 
liberal  thought,  and  his  ridicule  of  religious  customs  which,  however 
liable  to  abuse,  were  in  themselves  capable  of  justification,  seemed  most 
dangerous  to  the  orthodox  Spanish  mind  ;  and  only  the  more  large- 
hearted  were  able  to  discern  the  genuine  depth  of  his  piety. 

Nowhere,  therefore,  did  Erasmus'  writings  rouse  such  feelings  as  in 
Spain.     Diego  Lopez   de    Stuiiiga  and   Sancho   Carranza  de  Miranda 


1526-37]  Erasmistas  and  anti-erasmistas  401 

inveighed  against  him,  the  former  repeatedly,  accusing  him  of  bad 
scholarship,  of  heresy,  of  impiety,  calling  him  not  only  a  Lutheran  but 
the  standard-bearer  and  leader  of  the  Lutherans.  Erasmus  replied, 
publicly  and  privately,  with  comparative  moderation  ;  and  by  degrees  the 
controversy  died  away.  Meanwhile  he  had  many  personal  friends  in 
Spain,  through  whose  influence  some  of  his  writings  were  translated  into 
Spanish,  the  first  being  the  Enchiridion,  which  appeared  in  1526  or  1527 
with  a  dedication  to  Manrique  the  Inquisitor,  and  bearing  his  imprimatur. 
Some  spoke  against  it,  including  Ignatius  Loyola,  who  says  that  when  he 
read  it  (in  Latin)  it  relaxed  his  fervour  and  made  his  devotion  grow  cold  ;' 
nevertheless  it  had  a  wide  popularity.  This  brought  its  author  into  still 
greater  prominence  ;  and  a  contemporary  writer  says  that  his  name  was 
better  known  in  Spain  than  in  Rotterdam. 

Gradually  two  hostile  camps  were  formed,  of  erasmistas  and  anti- 
erasmistas.  In  1526  the  Archdeacon  Alfonso  Fernandes,  the  translator 
of  the  Encltiridion,  wrote  to  Coronel  that  certain  friars  were  preaching 
against  its  author,  and  suggesting  that  they  should  be  censured  ;  on  the 
other  hand,  the  friars  demanded  that  certain  theses  selected  from  Erasmus' 
writings  should  be  condemned.  In  the  ecclesiastical /?<?z^as  which  met 
at  Valladolid  in  Lent,  1527,  a  formal  encpiry  was  begun  before  Manrique 
and  a  body  of  theologians  ;  but  no  agreement  was  reached,  and  Manrique 
dissolved  the  enquiry,  leaving  things  as  they  were.  Alonso  Fonseca, 
Archbishop  of  Toledo,  also  took  the  part  of  Erasmus  ;  and  by  the 
influence  of  Gattinara  and  other  friends  at  the  Court  of  Charles  V  a  Bull 
was  obtained  from  Clement  VII  imposing  silence  upon  all  who  spoke  or 
wrote  against  his  writings,  which  "are  contrary  to  those  of  Luther." 
Thus  the  erasmistas  had  won  a  complete  victory,  and  for  a  time  had 
things  all  their  own  way.  But  after  the  death  of  Fonseca  in  1534  the 
tide  turned.  Juan  de  Vergara  and  his  brother  were  cited  before  the 
Inquisition,  accused,  says  Enzinas,  of  no  crime  but  favoring  Erasmus 
and  his  writings  ;  and  although  they  were  ultimately  acquitted,  it  was 
only  after  years  of  detention.  Fray  Alonso  de  Virues  was  condemned 
for  depreciating  the  monastic  state  and  was  immured  in  a  convent ;  but 
the  charges  were  so  preposterous  that  Charles  V,  whose  chaplain  he  was, 
came  to  his  rescue  ;  and  the  sentence  was  annulled  by  the  Pope.  Mateo 
Pascual,  professor  of  theology  at  Alcala,  was  less  fortunate  ;  he  had 
expressed  a  doubt  as  to  purgatory  in  a  public  discussion,  was  imprisoned, 
and  his  goods  were  confiscated.  Another  who  fell  under  suspicion  was 
the  great  scholar  Pedro  de  Lerma,  who  had  lived  at  Paris  over  fifty  years, 
had  been  dean  of  the  faculty  of  Theology  there,  and  had  returned  to 
Spain  as  Abbot  of  Compludo.  In  1537  he  was  called  upon  to  abjure 
eleven  "  Erasmian "  propositions,  one  of  which  seems  to  have  been 
justification  by  faith.  He  forthwith  returned  to  Paris,  at  the  age  of 
over  seventy  years,  accompanied  by  his  nephew  Francisco  de  Enzinas, 
in  whose  arms  he  died  not  long  after. 

C.   M.    H.    II.  26 


402  Francisco  de  Enzmas  [1543-5 

"  Erasmianism  "  gradually  died  out  in  Spain.  Elsewhere  it  either 
died  out,  or  took  a  line  of  its  own  (as  in  the  case  of  Juan  de  Valdes),  or 
became  merged  in  Protestantism.  Pedro  de  Lerma  was  on  the  border- 
line ;  his  nephews  crossed  it.  Francisco  de  Enzinas  (or  Dryander  as  his 
name  was  frequently  rendered)  was  the  younger  brother  of  that  Jaime 
who  was  burnt  at  Rome  in  1547  ;  they  were  sons  of  rich  and  noble 
parents  at  Burgos,  and  were  educated  at  Louvain  and  Paris.  On  the 
death  of  de  Lerma  Francisco  became  a  matriculated  student  of  Witten- 
berg University,  where  there  were  about  that  time  four  other  Spanish 
"students,  one  of  whom,  Mateo  Adriano,  was  professor  of  Hebrew  and 
medicine.  The  young  man  lived  in  the  house  of  Melanchthon,  becoming 
so  dear  to  him  that  he  was  often  spoken  of  as  "  Melanchthon's  soul  " ;  and  it 
was  by  his  advice  that  Enzinas  translated  the  New  Testament  into  excel- 
lent Spanish.  Having  finished  it  he  went  to  the  Low  Countries  ;  and 
from  this  point  we  are  able  to  follow  his  steps  by  means  of  his  Narrative. 
The  edicts  of  Charles  V  against  heresy  were  being  put  into  force,  but  he 
felt  safe,  as  he  had  many  friends.  He  presented  his  version  to  the  theolog- 
ical faculty  of  Louvain  for  their  imprimatur  ;  but  they  replied  that  they 
had  no  power  to  give  this,  and  could  not  judge  of  its  accuracy.  So  he  him- 
self published  it  at  Antwerp,  with  a  dedication  to  the  Emperor,  in  which 
he  defended  the  translating  of  the  Scriptures  (against  which,  he  said,  he 
knew  no  law)  and  placed  his  own  version  under  Charles'  protection. 
On  November  23,  1543,  he  arrived  at  Brussels  to  present  it  in  person,  and 
was  introduced  to  the  Emperor's  presence  by  the  Bishop  of  Jaen.  After  a 
conversation  of  which  Enzinas  has  left  a  rather  partial  account,  the  Em- 
peror promised  to  accept  the  dedication  provided  that  the  version  was  sat- 
isfactory ;   and  it  was  submitted  to  his  confessor,  Fray  Pedro  de  Soto. 

Soto  was  disposed  to  be  friendly,  but  took  the  precaution  of  mak- 
ing enquiries.  The  following  day  he  sent  for  the  young  man,  set  be- 
fore him  the  dangers  of  the  unguarded  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  as 
demonstrated  by  Alfonso  de  Castro  in  his  De  Haeresibus,  and  added  that 
Enzinas  had  broken  the  law  by  publishing  an  unlicensed  work  ;  also,  that 
he  was  still  more  to  blame  for  consorting  with  heretics  at  Wittenberg, 
and  for  publishing  a  heretical  book  based  upon  Luther's  De  servo  arhitrio. 
Enzinas  answered,  reasonably  enough,  that  there  was  no  law  in  Flanders 
against  translating  the  Bible,  and  that  if  it  was  wrong  to  consort  with 
the  German  doctors,  then  the  Emperor  himself  and  many  more  were  to 
blame.  As  to  the  book,  he  denied  roundly  that  he  had  ever  published 
anything  but  the  New  Testament,  a  denial  which  it  is  very  hard  to  accept. 
Ultimately  he  was  committed  to  prison  in  Brussels  for  his  civil  offence, 
and  thus  was  saved,  evidently  by  Soto's  desire,  from  the  tender  mercies  of 
the  Spanish  Inquisition.  There  he  remained,  in  easy  confinement,  until 
February  1, 1545,  when,  by  the  negligence,  or  more  probably  connivance, 
of  his  gaolers,  he  escaped  and  made  his  way  to  Wittenberg,  and  thence 
to  Strassburg,  Basel  and  elsewhere.     In  disgust  at  the  discords  amongst 


1545-50]  Juan  Diaz  403 

Protestants,  he  seriously  thought  of  going  to  Constantinople  to  preach 
the  Gospel  tliere ;  but  instead  of  doing  so  he  married  a  wife,  came  to 
England  on  Craumer's  invitation,  and  was  made  professor  of  Greek  at 
Cambridge.  There  he  remained  for  about  two  years ;  but  in  1549  he 
returned  to  the  Continent  to  arrange  for  the  printing  of  his  Spanish 
versions  of  the  classics,  and  died  at  Augsburg  on  December  30,  1550. 

Jaime  de  Enzinas  had  remained  at  Paris  for  some  time  after  his 
brother's  departure,  and  whilst  there  had  imbued  another  Spaniard, 
Juan  Diaz,  with  his  own  views.  Born  at  Cuenga,  the  city  of  the 
brothers  Valdes,  Diaz  had  studied  for  thirteen  years  at  Paris,  becoming 
proficient  in  theology  and  in  Hebrew.  About  1545  he  went  to  Geneva, 
and  spent  some  months  in  Calvin's  society.  Thence  he  passed  to 
Strassburg  with  the  brothers  Louis  and  Claud  de  Senarcleus,  the  latter  of 
whom,  with  the  help  of  Enzinas,  afterwards  wrote  his  life.  At  Strassburg 
the  tenets  of  Calvin  were  held  in  some  suspicion,  and  before  being 
admitted  to  communion  Diaz  was  called  upon  to  show  his  orthodoxy  by 
making  a  public  profession  of  faith.  At  the  end  of  the  year  the  city 
sent  Bucer  as  its  deputy  to  the  second  Colloquy  of  Ratisbon,  summoned 
by  Charles  V;  and  by  his  desire  Diaz  was  sent  with  him,  meanwhile 
acting  also  as  agent  for  Cardinal  du  Bellay,  the  protector  of  the 
Huguenots  of  France.  At  Ratisbon  in  1546  he  had  a  series  of 
discussions  with  the  Dominican  Fray  Pedro  de  Malvenda,  whom 
he  had  known  at  Paris ;  but  his  account  of  these  is  very  one-sided, 
and  all  that  is  certain  is  that  neither  converted  the  other.  From 
Ratisbon  Diaz  went  to  Neuburg  on  the  Danube.  Meanwhile,  news 
of  his  doings  reached  his  brother  Alfonso,  who  was  a  lawyer  at 
Pavia.  He  at  once  hastened  to  him  in  the  hope  of  being  able  to 
persuade  him  to  return  to  the  Church,  or  at  least  to  abandon  the 
society  of  the  Germans.  On  the  advice  of  Ochino,  who  was  then  at 
Augsburg,  Juan  refused  to  do  either,  Alfonso,  maddened  with  fanaticism 
and  the  shame  of  having  a  heretic  in  the  family,  thereupon  compassed 
his  death,  and,  with  an  accomplice,  cruelly  assassinated  him  at  Feld- 
kirchen  on  March  27,  1546.  The  murderers  were  captured  and  brought 
to  trial  at  Innsbruck  ;  but  as  they  were  in  minor  Orders,  Soto  and  others 
caused  the  case  to  be  cited  to  Rome,  where  the  murderers  escaped  scot- 
free.  Not  unnaturally  the  Protestants  regarded  Diaz  as  a  martyr,  and 
attributed  his  death  to  the  direct  orders  of  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  ; 
but  though  they  connived  at  the  escape  of  the  murderers,  the  act  itself 
was  certainly  one  of  private  vengeance. 

Another  Spaniard  who  adopted  the  Reformed  views  about  this  time 
was  Francisco  de  San  Roman,  a  rich  merchant  from  Burgos.  In  1540, 
going  from  Antwerp  to  Bremen  on  business,  he  went  by  chance  into 
a  Lutheran  church  where  Jakob  Speng,  formerly  prior  of  the  Austin 
canons  at  Antwerp,  was  preaching.  Although  he  knew  no  German,  he 
was  attracted  by  the  preacher,  stayed  at  his  house,  and  adopted  his 


404  Reform  movements  in  Spain  [i52i-70 

views.  He  at  once  began  to  preach  and  to  write  in  Spanish,  with  the 
eagerness  of  fanaticism  and  the  self-confidence  of  ignorance.  Returning 
to  Flanders,  he  was  arrested  and  examined ;  his  books  were  burnt,  and 
he  himself  was  imprisoned.  Being  released  after  six  months,  he  went  to 
Louvain,  where  he  met  Enzinas,  who  rebuked  him  for  risking  his  life 
uselessly  by  shrieking  like  a  madman  in  the  market-places,  and  for 
impiousl}^  taking  upon  himself  to  preach  without  a  call  from  God, 
and  without  the  requisite  gifts  or  knowledge.  The  rebuke  made  no 
impression.  In  1541  he  went  to  Ratisbon  and  presented  himself  before 
Charles,  who  heard  him  patiently  again  and  again,  but  at  length 
ordered  his  detention  as  a  heretic.  He  was  taken  to  Spain,  handed  over 
to  the  Inquisition,  and  burned  in  an  auto-de-fe  at  Valladolid  in  1542. 
His  fidelity  won  him  commendation  where  his  rashness  and  ignorance 
had  failed ;  and  after  his  death  Speng  wrote  to  Enzinas  with  the 
tenderest  reverence  and  love  for  the  man  whom  they  had  little  esteemed 
while  he  lived. 

Passing  over  Pedro  Nunez  Vela  of  Avila,  of  whom  little  is  known 
save  that  in  1548  and  again  in  1570  he  is  spoken  of  as  professor  of 
Greek  at  Lausanne,  we  turn  to  Reform  movements  within  Spain  itself. 
Precautions  had  been  taken  from  1521  onwards  to  prevent  the  diffusion 
of  Lutheran  books  in  Spain.  Attempts  were  not  infrequently  made  to 
introduce  them  by  sea :  in  1524  two  casks  full  were  discovered  and 
burnt  at  Santander,  and  in  the  following  year  Venetian  galleys  were 
attempting  to  land  them  on  the  south-eastern  shore.  But  it  was  neither 
in  Biscay  nor  in  Granada  that  the  storm  burst,  nor  was  it  caused  by 
the  importation  of  Lutheran  books.  It  began  in  Seville  and  in 
Valladolid  then  the  capital  of  Spain ;  and  amongst  its  leaders,  even  if 
they  were  not  its  founders,  were  three  chaplains  of  the  Emperor, 
Dr  Agustin  Cazalla,  Dr  Constantino  Ponce  de  la  Fuente,  and  Fray 
Bartolome  Carranza,  Archbishop  of  Toledo  and  Primate  of  Spain. 

To  begin  with  Seville.  A  noble  gentleman  there,  Rodrigo  de  Valer, 
suddenly  turned  from  a  worldly  life  to  one  of  devotion,  studying  the 
Bible  till  he  knew  it  almost  b}^  heart.  He  also  began  to  inveigh  against 
the  corruptions  of  the  Church,  preaching  in  the  streets  and  squares,  and 
even  on  the  Cathedral  steps,  saying  that  he  was  sent  by  Christ  to  correct 
that  evil  and  adulterous  generation.  He  was  more  than  once  cited 
before  the  Inquisition,  but  treated  with  great  leniency,  partly  because 
he  was  thought  to  be  insane,  partly  because  he  was  a  cristiano  viej'o, 
without  admixture  of  Jewish  or  Moorish  blood.  At  length  he  was 
condemned  to  wear  a  samhenito  and  to  undergo  perpetual  imprisonment 
in  a  convent.  There  he  died  about  1550.  His  life  had  not  been  fruit- 
less :  he  had  made  many  converts,  amongst  them  the  canon  Juan  Gil, 
of  01  vera  in  Aragon.  Gil,  or  Egidio  (as  he  was  also  called),  had 
studied  with  distinction  at  Alcala,  and  was  a  master  of  theology  of 


1533-56]  Gil,  Constantino,  and  Vargas  405 

Siguenza.  About  1537  he  obtained  the  magistral  canoniy  of  Seville, 
which  imposed  on  him  the  duty  of  preaching.  At  first  his  preaching 
had  little  success.  But  he  gained  new  views  of  truth  by  his  intercourse 
with  Valer,  and  before  long  he  became  famous  as  a  preacher. 

But  he  owed  even  more  to  his  brother-canon,  Constantino  Ponce  de 
la  Fuente,  than  to  Valer ;  for  he  it  was  who  first  taught  him,  in  set  terms, 
the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  Constantino,  a  native  of  San 
Clemente  near  Cuenga,  had  studied  at  Alcala  with  Gil  and  a  certain 
Dr  Vargas;  he  was  a  man  of  great  learning,  skilled  in  Greek  and 
Hebrew,  who  had  probably  learnt  the  doctrine  of  Justification  from 
books.  In  1533  he  had  been  made  a  canon  of  Seville ;  and  although 
he  was  not  so  popular  there  as  Gil,  elsewhere  his  fame  was  far  greater. 
The  three  friends  now  began  to  work  together,  Gil  being  the  most  active. 
He  and  Constantino  preached  diligently ;  Vargas  expounded  the  Gospel 
of  St  Matthew  and  the  Psalms  ;  and  by  degrees  they  gathered  a  body  of 
adherents  to  whom  they  ministered  in  secret.  For  a  long  while  nothing 
was  suspected ;  in  fact,  Constantino  was  chosen  by  the  Emperor  to 
accompany  him  as  his  preacher  and  confessor,  and  was  out  of  Spain  with 
him  from  1548  to  1551,  mucli  revered  and  honoured.  He  subsequently 
came  to  England  with  Philip  II,  and  only  returned  to  Seville  late  in 
1555.  During  this  period  he  produced  a  series  of  books  which  were 
then  much  valued,  but  were  ultimately  regarded  as  heretical. 

Meanwhile,  the  others  had  been  less  fortunate.  Gil,  indeed,  had 
been  nominated  by  the  Emperor  for  a  bishopric  in  1550  ;  but  soon 
afterwards  he  and  Vargas  were  cited  before  the  Inquisition.  Vargas  fell 
ill  and  died ;  but  Gil  was  proceeded  against  vigorously,  the  charges 
including  the  points  of  Justification,  Works,  Purgatory,  Invocation  of 
Saints,  and  actual  iconoclasm  in  the  Cathedral.  In  prison  he  wrote  an 
apology  on  Justification  which  was  held  to  make  his  case  worse ;  but 
ultimately,  on  Sunday,  August  21,  1552,  he  made  a  public  recantation 
in  the  Cathedral,  extorted,  his  friends  afterwards  said,  by  fraud.  Ho  was 
sentenced  to  a  3^ear's  imprisonment  in  the  castle  of  Triana  near  Seville 
(the  headquarters  of  the  Inquisition),  with  permission  to  come  to  the 
Cathedral  fifteen  times  ;  he  was  to  fast  strictly  every  Friday,  to  make  his 
confession  monthly,  communicating  or  not  as  his  confessor  directed,  not 
to  leave  Spain,  not  to  say  mass  for  a  year,  or  to  exercise  other  functions 
for  ten  years.  Gil  however  did  not  modify  his  views.  In  1555  he 
visited  the  Reformed  at  Valladolid,  and  died  a  few  days  after  his  return, 
early  in  1566. 

The  Chapter  of  Seville  had  stood  by  their  colleague  nobly,  although, 
or  perhaps  because,  their  Archbishop,  the  stern  Fernando  de  Valdes,  was 
at  the  head  of  the  Inquisition.  They  paid  Gil  a  considerable  salary 
whilst  he  was  in  prison,  and  set  over  his  grave  in  the  Cathedral  a  fine 
monument  ;  moreover,  in  spite  of  great  opposition,  they  elected  Con- 
stantino magistral  canon  in  his  place.     He  at  once  took  up  his  friend's 


406  Reformers  at  Seville  [1556-67 

work,  and  besides  preaching  began  a  course  of  Bible  lectures  at  a  school 
in  the  city.  By  degrees  he  also  was  suspected  by  the  Inquisition,  which 
frequently  summoned  him  to  explain  his  conduct.  When  his  friends 
asked  him  the  reason  of  his  frequent  visits  to  Triana,  he  replied, 
"  They  wish  to  burn  me,  but  as  yet  they  find  me  too  green."  As  time 
went  on  he  began  to  lose  heart,  and  at  length,  in  order  to  disarm 
suspicion,  resolved  to  join  the  newly-arrived  Jesuits.  But  they  had 
been  warned,  and  refused  to  receive  one  who  would  otherwise  have  been 
acceptable  enough  as  a  recruit. 

At  length  the  Inquisition  obtained  proof  of  what  they  had  doubtless 
long  suspected  :  there  existed  in  Seville  a  sect  of  considerable  size,  whose 
members  met  together  secretly  and  had  their  own  organisation  and 
services.  They  had  grown  up  about  Gil  and  Constantino,  had  increased 
rapidly,  and  had  obtained  copies  of  the  New  Testament  from  abroad 
through  the  activity  of  one  of  their  members.  The  detection  of  this 
society  led  to  the  accidental  discovery  of  a  large  collection  of  Constan- 
tino's writings,  in  which  he  had  spoken  his  full  mind.  He  was  at  once 
arrested.  After  a  vain  denial,  he  avowed  that  the  books  were  his,  and  that 
they  represented  his  convictions.  He  was  imprisoned  in  the  dungeons 
of  Triana,  and  died  two  years  afterwards  of  disease  and  privation. 
Meanwhile,  the  search  went  on  vigorously ;  and  hj  degrees  all  was 
discovered.  From  the  Sanctae  Inquisitionis  artes  aliquot  deteetae,  pub- 
ished  under  an  assumed  name  in  1567  by  a  former  member  of  the  sect, 
it  appears  that  more  than  eight  hundred  people  were  proceeded  against 
altogether.  They  had  two  centres,  the  house  of  Isabel  de  Baena,  "  the 
temple  of  the  new  light,"  the  place  "where  the  faithful  assembled  to  hear 
the  Word  of  God,"  and  the  Hieronymite  monastery  of  San  Isidro.  Led  by 
their  prior  Garci-Arias,  known  as  Maestro  Blanco  from  his  white  hair,  the 
friars  of  San  Isidro  embraced  the  new  views  almost  to  a  man,  amongst 
them  being  the  learned  Cristobal  de  Arellano,  Antonio  del  Corro,  and 
Cipriano  de  Valera ;  they  abolished  fasts  and  mortifications,  and  sub- 
stituted readings  from  the  Scriptures  for  the  canonical  hours.  Amongst 
the  lay  members  of  the  sect  were  Juan  Ponce  de  Leon,  second  son  of  the 
Count  de  Bailen,  Juan  Gonzales,  the  physician  Cristobal  de  Losada,  and 
Fernando  de  San  Juan,  rector  of  the  Colegio  de  la  doctrina;  above  all, 
there  was  Julian  Hernandez,  known  to  the  rest  as  Julianillo,  since  he 
was  very  small  of  stature  and  "no  more  than  skin  and  bone."  But  he 
was  a  man  of  fearless  courage,  and  by  his  means  they  were  able  to 
procure  religious  books  in  SjDanish,  including  the  New  Testament. 
Juan  Perez,  the  former  rector  of  the  Colegio  de  la  doctrina,  had  fled 
from  Spain  when  Gil  was  arrested ;  in  his  exile  he  had  prepared  a 
version  of  the  New  Testament,  which  was  published  at  Venice  in  1556. 
By  the  courage  and  resourcefulness  of  Julianillo  two  great  tuns  filled 
with  copies  were  safely  smuggled  into  Seville,  despite  the  watchfulness 
of  the  Inquisition. 


1542-60]  The  Reform  at  Valladolid  407 

Little  by  little  the  Inquisition  got  through  its  work,  drawing  its  net 
closer  and  closer  about  the  chief  offenders  and  allowing  lesser  persons 
to  go  free  on  doing  penance.  At  an  auto-de-fe  celebrated  in  the  Plaza 
de  San  Francisco  on  September  24, 1559,  fourteen  persons  were  burnt  to 
death  for  heresy,  including  four  friars  and  three  women.  A  large  number 
were  sentenced  to  lesser  penalties  ;  and  the  house  of  Isabel  de  Baena, 
in  which  they  met,  was  razed  to  the  ground,  a  "  pillar  of  infamy  "  being 
erected  on  the  site.  On  December  22, 1560,  a  second  auto  was  celebrated 
at  the  same  place,  when  eight  women,  one  being  a  nun,  and  two  men, 
one  of  whom  was  Julianillo,  were  burnt.  Gil,  Constantino,  and  Perez 
were  burnt  in  effigy,  and  a  number  of  friars  and  others  were  visited  with 
lesser  penalties.  Some  contrived  to  escape  and  fled  from  Spain ;  and 
a  few  single  cases  of  heresy  were  dealt  with  in  later  years.  Thus  ended 
the  history  of  the  Reform  in  Seville. 

At  Valladolid  the  movement  had  already  come  to  an  end,  for 
although  it  began  later  than  at  Seville,  it  was  discovered  somewhat 
earlier.  Its  founder  was  Agustin  Cazalla,  born  of  rich  parents  who 
had  lost  rank  for  Judaising.  He  had  studied  under  Carranza  at 
Valladolid,  and  afterwards  at  Alcala.  In  1542  he  was  made  chaplain 
and  preacher  to  the  Emperor,  and  till  1551  followed  the  Court.  On  his 
return  to  Spain  he  was  made  canon  of  Salamanca  and  from  that  time 
forward  dwelt  there  or  at  Valladolid.  He  became  addicted  to  the 
Reform  either  under  Carranza's  instructions  or  in  Germany,  and  was 
confirmed  in  his  views  by  Carlos  de  Seso,  a  nobleman  from  Italy  who  had 
married  a  Spanish  wife  and  had  been  made  corregidor  of  Toro.  Seso 
had  heard  of  justification  in  Italy,  and  became  an  ardent  propagandist ; 
in  fact  it  is  clear  that  Toro,  not  Valladolid,  was  the  real  birthplace  of 
the  movement  in  New  Castile.  A  large  number  of  well-born  persons 
accepted  Seso's  teaching,  including  the  licentiate  Heri-ezuelo,  Fray 
Domingo  de  Rojas,  many  members  of  the  Cazalla  family,  and  many 
devout  ladies  ;  and  all  who  accepted  it  became  teachers  themselves. 
Zamora  and  Logroilo,  near  which  town  Seso  had  a  house,  were  affected 
by  the  movement ;  above  all,  it  found  its  headquarters  in  Valladolid,  where 
it  soon  had  a  very  large  following,  both  of  rich  and  poor.  The  nuns  of 
the  rich  House  of  Belen,  outside  the  city,  were  largely  involved  ;  so  were 
many  of  the  clergy.  jNIeetings  and  services  were  held  frequently,  and 
the  communion  administered  in  the  house  of  Leonor  de  Vibera,  Cazalla's 
mother. 

It  is  not  known  how  they  were  discovered,  but  the  arrests  were 
precipitated  by  the  action  taken  at  Zamora,  by  the  Bishop,  against 
Cristobal  de  Padilla,  steward  to  the  Marquesa  de  Alcaiiices,  who  was 
preaching  the  new  doctrines  there.  He  was  able  to  warn  his  friends 
in  the  capital,  some  of  whom  fled  to  Navarre,  and  thence  into  France. 
But  the  greater  number  were  already  taken  early  in  June,  1558 ;  the 


408  Autos-de-fe  at  Valladolid  [i5o9-7i 

prisons  were  full ;  and  Valdes  the  Inquisitor-General  was  able  to  report 
to  Charles  V,  in  his  retirement  at  Yuste,  that  each  day  brought  fresh 
evidence  against  them.  Moreover,  mutual  trust  was  lacking ;  when 
under  examination,  even  without  torture,  they  accused  one  another  and 
endeavoured  by  all  means  to  exculpate  themselves,  so  that  there  was  no 
lack  of  incriminating  evidence.  The  cause  was  pressed  on  vigorously, 
special  powers  being  sought  from  Rome  that  it  might  not  be  delayed  ; 
and  an  auto-de-fe,  the  first  against  heresy,  was  arranged  for  Trinity 
Sunday,  May  21,  1559,  to  be  held  in  the  Plaza  Mayor. 

On  the  appointed  day  a  concourse  gathered,  the  like  of  which  had 
seldom  been  seen.  After  a  sermon  by  the  theologian  Melchor  Cano,  the 
sentences  were  read  out.  Fourteen  heretics  were  condemned  to  death, 
together  with  a  Portuguese  Jew.  They  were  Agustin  Cazalia  and  his 
brother  Francisco  (also  a  priest),  his  sister  and  four  other  women,  and 
seven  laymen,  including  Juan  Garcia,  a  worker  in  silver  of  Valladolid, 
and  Anton  Asel,  a  peasant.  The  bones  of  Leonor  de  Vibera  were  burnt, 
her  house  pulled  down,  and  the  spot  was  marked  by  a  "  pillar  of  infamy." 
Sixteen  were  reconciled,  and  sentenced  to  various  terms  of  imprisonment ; 
thirty-seven  were  reserved  in  prison.  Of  those  who  suffered,  most  showed 
sufficient  signs  of  penitence  to  be  strangled  before  being  burnt,  including 
Cazalia  himself.  But  exhortations  were  wasted  uj)on  the  licentiate 
Herrezuelo,  who  held  to  his  opinions  and  was  burnt  alive. 

A  second  auto  followed  on  October  8,  in  the  presence  of  Philip  himself. 
Seven  men  and  six  women  were  burnt,  and  five  women  were  imprisoned 
for  life.  The  former  included  Fray  Domingo  de  Rojas,  Pedro  Cazalia, 
two  other  priests,  a  nun  of  Santa  Clara  at  Valladolid,  and  four  nuns  of 
Belen ;  of  the  latter,  three  were  nuns  of  Belen.  Several  of  those  who 
were  burnt  were  gagged  that  they  might  not  speak  ;  but  Fray  Domingo 
demanded  leave  to  address  the  King,  and  said,  "Although  I  die  here  as  a 
heretic  in  the  opinion  of  the  people,  yet  I  believe  in  God  Almighty,  the 
F'ather,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  I  believe  in  the  passion  of 
Christ,  which  alone  suffices  to  save  the  world,  without  any  other  work 
save  the  justification  of  the  soul  to  be  with  God ;  and  in  this  faith  I 
believe  that  I  shall  be  saved."  It  would  seem,  however,  that  only  tv/o 
were  burnt  alive,  Carlos  de  Seso  and  Juan  Sanchez. 

Many  isolated  cases  of  heresy  are  to  be  found  after  this,  and  doubtless 
the  records  of  others  have  perished.  Leonor  de  Cisneros,  the  mother  of 
Herrezuelo,  was  burnt  alive  as  an  obstinate  heretic  on  September  26, 
1568  ;  several  cases  of  heresy  were  dealt  with  at  an  auto-de-fe  at  Toledo 
in  1571,  and  recent  research  has  found  a  certain  number  of  other  instances 
elsewhere.  As  time  went  on  such  cases  were  in  increasing  proportion  of 
foreign  origin.  But  wherever  heresy  was  discovered  it  was  ruthlessly 
stamped  out.  Nor  was  this  merely  the  work  of  a  few  officials.  From  his 
retirement  at  Yuste  Charles  V  adjured  his  son  to  carry  out  the  work  of 


1503-82]  Bartolome  de  Carranza  409 

repression  to  the  uttermost ;  and  Philip  replied  that  he  would  do  what 
his  father  wished  and  more  also.  He  told  Carlos  de  Seso  that  if  his  own 
son  were  a  heretic,  he  would  himself  carry  the  wood  to  burn  him ;  and 
in  this,  as  in  most  other  things,  he  was  a  typical  Spaniard.  The  rage 
against  heresy  regarded  all  learning,  all  evangelical  teaching,  with 
suspicion;  to  speak  overmuch  of  faith  or  of  inward  religion  might 
be  a  disparagement  of  works  and  of  outward  religion.  Sooner  or 
later  most  of  the  learned  men  of  the  day  were  cited  on  suspicion  of 
heresy,  or,  if  not  actually  cited,  their  actions  and  words  were  carefully 
watched.  Fray  Luis  de  Leon,  poet  and  scholar,  spent  nearly  five  years 
in  the  prisons  of  the  Inquisition  whilst  his  works  were  being  examined  ; 
and  although  he  was  at  length  acquitted,  his  Translation  of  the  Song 
of  Solomon  was  suppressed,  and  he  again  fell  under  suspicion  in  1582. 
Juan  de  Avila,  Luis  de  Granada,  even  St  Teresa,  and  St  John  of  the 
Cross  were  accused ;  and  it  is  said  that  Alva  himself  and  Don  John  of 
Austria  were  not  above  suspicion. 

Above  all,  the  Inquisition  struck,  and  not  ineffectively,  at  the 
highest  ecclesiastic  in  Spain,  and  brought  him  low,  even  to  the  ground. 
Bartolome  de  Carranza  was  born  in  1503,  of  a  noble  family,  at  Miranda 
in  Navarre,  and  he  entered  the  Dominican  Order  at  the  age  of  seventeen. 
In  1523  he  was  sent  to  the  College  of  San  Gregorio  at  Valladolid,  of 
which  he  ultimately  became  Rector.  It  is  possible  that  on  a  visit  to 
Rome  in  1539,  to  attend  the  Chapter-general  of  his  Order,  he  met  Juan 
Valdes.  As  time  went  on  Bartolome  was  more  and  more  honoured  in 
Spain  for  his  learning  and  goodness.  In  1545  Charles  V  sent  him  as 
theologian  to  the  Council  of  Trent,  where  he  won  golden  opinions.  His 
doctrine  of  Justification  was  indeed  questioned  on  one  occasion ;  but  he 
had  no  difficulty  in  showing  that  his  words  were  in  harmon}^  with  the 
decree  of  the  Council,  and  he  was  vigorous  in  his  treatment  of  heretical 
books.  In  Spain  (1553),  in  England  (1554),  and  in  Flanders  (1557), 
he  showed  himself  zealous  against  heresy ;  and  when,  late  in  the  latter 
year,  he  was  chosen  to  be  Archbishop  of  Toledo,  his  own  was  the  single 
dissentient  voice.  Having  at  length  accepted  the  office,  he  gave  himself 
unreservedly  to  its  duties.  But  it  soon  appeared  that  he  was  not  without 
enemies.  Some  of  the  Bishops  were  ill-disposed  towards  him  because 
he  rigorously  enforced  upon  them  the  duty  of  residence.  Valdes,  the 
Inquisitor-General,  was  jealous  of  him,  perhaps  because  he  himself  had 
aspired  to  the  primatial  see.  And  the  great  theologian  Melchor  Cano, 
of  his  own  order,  was  a  lifelong  rival.  The  two  men  differed  in  the 
whole  tone  of  their  minds;  Fray  Melchor  was  a  thinker  of  almost 
mathematical  accuracy,  Avhile  Fray  Bartolome  reasoned  from  the  heart. 

Under  these  circumstances  very  little  evidence  would  suffice  for  a 
process  for  heresy;  and  Carranza  himself,  learning  that  it  was  in 
contemplation,  wrote  repeatedly  to  the  Inquisitors  in  his  own  defence. 
Valdes  however  had  applied  to  Rome  for  permission  to  proceed  against 


410  Trial  of  Carranza  [1559-76 

him.  The  brief  arrived  on  April  8,  1559,  the  King  gave  his  permission 
in  June,  and  in  August  Carranza  was  arrested  and  imprisoned.  The 
main  charges  against  him  were  based  upon  his  relations  with  Cazalla, 
Domingo  de  Rojas,  and  others  then  under  condemnation  ;  upon  his 
w^ritings,  especially  the  Qommentaries  on  the  Catechism,  which  he  had 
published  at  Antwerp  just  after  he  became  primate ;  and  upon  his  last 
interview  with  Charles  V.  Of  these  the  first  head  was  by  far  the  most 
serious.  Many  of  the  accused  at  Valladolid  spoke  of  the  way  in  which 
he  had  met  their  doubts  in  the  early  days  of  the  movement ;  and  Rojas 
in  particular,  desiring  to  shelter  himself  under  the  aegis  of  his  old 
master,  had  in  effect  implicated  him.  The  evidence  showed  that  he  had 
been  in  correspondence  with  Juan  Valdes  ;  and  it  seems  clear  that  at  this 
period  his  position  had  been  that  of  the  loyal  doctrinal  Reformers  of 
Italy.  Although  he  had  willingly  accepted  the  Tridentine  decree  on 
Justification,  it  does  not  appear  that  his  doctrinal  position  ever  really 
changed.  His  interview  with  Charles  V  had  been  very  short,  but  he  was 
accused  of  making  use  of  words  which  savoured  of  heresy.  The  Catecismo 
was  next  examined  :  and,  although  some,  both  of  the  prelates  and  of  the 
doctors,  had  no  fault  to  find,  others  censured  it  severely.  Melchor  Cano 
in  particular  found  much  that  was  ambiguous,  much  that  was  temerarious, 
much  that  was  even  heretical,  in  the  sense  in  which  it  was  said.  Never- 
theless, the  Tridentine  censors  had  pronounced  the  book  orthodox  and 
had  given  it  their  approval. 

The  process  dragged  on  its  slow  length,  with  many  delays  and  many 
interruptions.  At  length  the  case  was  cited  to  Rome.  On  December  5, 
1566,  Carranza  came  out  of  his  prison,  and  a  few  months  afterwards 
he  set  out  for  Italy.  Here  the  question  had  to  be  reopened,  and  the 
documents  re-examined  and  in  many  cases  translated,  which  involved 
a  further  delay.  But  it  appears  that  Pius  V  was  convinced  of  Carranza's 
innocence ;  and  a  decree  would  probably  have  been  given  in  his  favour 
had  not  the  Pope  died  on  May  1,  1572.  His  successor  Gregory  XIII 
reopened  the  case,  and  sentence  was  not  actually  given  till  April  14, 
1576.  The  Archbishop  was  declared  to  have  taken  many  errors  and 
modes  of  speech  from  the  heretics,  on  account  of  which  he  was  "  vehe- 
mently suspected  "  of  heresy  ;  and  he  was  condemned  to  abjure  sixteen 
propositions.  Having  done  this,  and  performed  certain  penances,  he 
was  to  be  free  from  all  censures,  but  to  be  suspended  for  five  years  from 
the  exercise  of  his  office,  meanwhile  dwelling  in  the  house  of  his  Order  at 
Orvieto.  The  Catecismo  was  prohibited  altogether.  The  decision  was 
severe,  but  not  unjust  according  to  the  views  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
which  applied  the  tests  of  doctrinal  orthodoxy  to  the  minutiae  of 
individual  opinion.  But  Carranza  was  no  longer  subject  to  it;  for 
seventeen  years  in  prison  had  broken  his  strength.  He  endeavoured 
to  fulfil  his  penances,  humbly  made  his  profession  of  faith  and  received 
the  Eucharist,  and  expired  on  May  2,  1576. 


1511-53]  Miguel  Serveto  411 

Thus  ended  the  Reform  in  Spain,  as  it  had  ended  in  Italy,  uprooted 
by  the  intolerant  dogmatism  which  assumed  that  there  was  an  ascertained 
answer  to  every  possible  theological  question,  confused  right-thinking  with 
accuracy  of  knowledge,  and  discerned  heresy  in  every  reaction  and  every 
independent  effort  of  the  human  mind.  Many  of  those  who  had  been 
driven  out  of  Spain  continued  to  work  elsewhere.  Such  were  Juan  Perez 
already  referred  to,  Cassiodoro  de  Reina,  and  Cipriano  Valera,  each  of 
whom  translated  the  whole  Bible  into  Spanish,  and  many  more.  But 
without  following  these  further,  mention  must  be  made  of  one  great 
Spanish  thinker  of  the  earlier  part  of  the  century,  who  spent  most  of  his 
life  abroad.  Miguel  Serveto  y  Reves  was  born  at  Tudela  in  Navarre 
about  1511,  his  family  being  of  Villanueva  in  Aragon  ;  and  he  studied 
at  Toulouse.  As  secretar3'to  Juan  de  Quintana,the  Emperor's  confessor, 
he  was  with  him  at  Bologna  in  1529  and  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg 
in  1530  (where  he  met  Melanchthon,  of  whose  Loci  communes  he  became 
a  diligent  student),  but  soon  afterwards  left  his  service  and  went  to 
Basel.  In  1531  he  published  his  De  Trinitatis  Urroribus,  and  in  1552 
two  Dialogues  on  the  Trinity  :  and  the  suspicion  which  he  incurred  by 
his  views  led  him  to  flee  to  France.  Here  for  the  first  time  he  met 
Calvin,  who  was  his  antithesis  in  ever}^  way,  being  as  clear,  logical,  and 
narrow  in  his  views  as  Serveto  was  the  reverse.  After  acting  as  proof- 
reader to  Trechsel  at  Lyons,  and  producing  a  remarkable  edition  of 
Ptolemy,  he  went  to  study  medicine  at  Paris.  In  this  field  he  greatly 
distinguished  himself,  for  he  appears  to  have  been  the  first  discoverer  of 
the  circulation  of  the  blood.  After  a  period  of  wandering,  during  which  he 
submitted  torebaptismby  the  Anabaptists  of  Charlieu,  he  cameto  Vienne, 
where  his  old  pupil  Pierre  Palmier  was  now  Archbishop,  and  remained 
there  till  1553.  In  1546-7  he  engaged  in  a  violent  theological  con- 
troversy with  Calvin  ;  and  when  at  length  he  published  his  Christianismi 
Restitutio  the  letters  were  added  to  the  book  as  a  kind  of  appendix.  Not 
unnaturall}^  offended,  Calvin  meanly  accused  his  adversary,  through  an 
intermediary,  to  the  Inquisition,  and  in  April,  1553,  both  Serveto  and  the 
printer  of  the  book  were  imprisoned.  Serveto  made  his  escape,  probably 
by  complicity  of  his  gaolers,  and  was  burnt  in  effigy  (June  17).  He 
now  resolved  to  make  his  way  into  northern  Italy  ;  but  b}^  a  strange 
mischance  he  went  by  way  of  Geneva.  His  arrival  was  reported  to  Cal- 
vin, who  resolved  that  his  enemy  should  not  escape  ;  the  blasphemer 
must  die.     On  October  27,  1553,  Serveto  was  burnt  at  the  stake. 

It  is  difficult  to  estimate  his  theological  position  ;  for  his  one  follower, 
Alfonso  Ligurio  of  Tarragona,  is  now  little  more  than  a  name.  Miguel 
Serveto  stands  quite  alone,  and  towers  far  above  other  sceptical  thinkers 
of  his  age.  In  some  ways  essentially  modern,  he  is  in  others  essentially 
medieval.  He  could  not  throw  in  his  lot  with  any  part}^  because  he 
held  that  all  existing  religions  alike  were  partly  right  and  partly  wrong. 
It  is  impossible  to  judge  of  him  by  constructing  a  theological  system 


412  Social  condition  of  Portugal  [1526-7 

from  his  writings ;  for  his  mind  was  analytic  and  not  synthetic,  his 
tenets  varied  from  time  to  time,  and  his  system  was  after  all  but  a 
framework  by  means  of  which  he  endeavoured  to  hold  and  to  express 
certain  great  ideas  —  creation  in  the  Logos^  the  immanence  of  God  in  the 
universe,  and  the  like.  But  in  his  anxiety  to  correct  the  rigidity  of 
the  theological  conceptions  of  his  age  he  took  up  a  position  which  often 
degenerated  into  the  merest  shallow  negation ;  and  his  books  on  the 
Trinity  are  anti-trinitarian,  not  because  of  his  teaching,  but  in  spite  of 
it.  And  thus,  whilst  supplying  many  elements  which  were  lacking  to  the 
religious  consciousness  of  most  other  men  of  his  age,  he  obscured  them, 
and  marred  his  own  usefulness  immeasurably,  by  alloying  them  with 
elements  of  dogmatic  anti-trinitarianism  which  were  never  of  the  essence 
of  his  teaching. 


Ill 

PORTUGAL 

In  Portugal  the  religious  revolt  never  attained  serious  dimensions  : 
there  were  a  few  erasmistas,  and  a  number  of  foreigners  were  proceeded 
against  for  heresy  from  time  to  time  ;  but  that  is  all.  Nevertheless,  the 
prevalence  of  heresy  was  one  of  the  reasons  alleged  for  the  founding  of 
the  Lisbon  Inquisition  ;  and  the  circumstances  under  which  this  took 
place  may  well  claim  attention  here. 

The  social  condition  of  Portugal  in  the  early  part  of  the  sixteenth 
century  Avas  not  a  little  remarkable.  Great  opportunities  for  acquiring 
wealth  had  suddenly  been  opened  to  its  people  by  the  discovery  and 
colonisation  of  the  Indies.  The  result  was  that  they  flocked  abroad  as 
colonists,  or  else  left  the  country  districts  in  order  to  engage  in  commerce 
at  Oporto  or  Lisbon,  which  rapidly  increased  in  size.  But  this  had  a 
curious  effect  upon  the  rural  districts.  Before  long  there  were  scarcely 
any  peasants,  and  the  few  that  there  were  demanded  high  wages.  To 
supply  their  place,  the  landowners  began  to  import  huge  gangs  of  negro 
slaves,  who  were  far  cheaper,  and  could  be  obtained  in  any  number  that 
was  required.  But  this  system  had  one  great  disadvantage,  so  far  as  the 
exchequer  was  concerned.  It  became  increasingly  difficult  to  get  the 
taxes  paid ;  for  there  was  no  longer  anybody  to  pay  them,  the  property  of 
the  merchants  being  for  the  most  part  not  within  reach  for  the  i)urpose. 
And  thus  the  King,  Dom  Joao  III  (1526-57),  found  himself  in  a 
curious  position.  He  had  great  hoards  of  money  in  the  treasury,-  but 
there  was  a  continual  drain  upon  them ;  and  there  were  no  means  of 
replenishing  them,  although  he  reigned  over  the  richest  people  in 
Europe.  In  a  letter  to  Clement  VII  dated  June  28, 1526,  he  complains 
of  his  poverty,  and  gives  this  as  his  reason  for  not  succouring  the  King 
of  Hungary  in  his  resistance  to  the  Turks. 


1527-32]  Establishment  of  the  Inquisition  413 

Various  expedients  were  adopted  in  order  to  replenish  the  royal 
treasury.  Amongst  others,  a  Bull  of  1527  gave  the  King  the  right  of 
nominating  the  heads  of  all  monasteries  in  his  realm,  with  all  the  pecu- 
niary advantages  which  this  privilege  involved.  But  Dom  Joao  soon 
found  that  he  could  not  make  much  from  this  source  without  scandalising 
his  people  and  incurring  the  enmity  of  the  Church.  There  was  however 
a  source  of  revenue,  yet  untapped,  which  was  not  open  to  this  objection  : 
namely,  the  novos  cristaos.  If  he  could  proceed  against  them  as  was  done 
in  Spain,  a  lucrative  harvest  was  ready  to  hand.  Accordingly,  early 
in  1531  the  King  instructed  Bras  Neto,  his  agent  in  Rome,  to  apply  to 
the  Holy  See  for  a  Bull  establishing  the  Inquisition  in  Portugal  on  the 
lines  of  that  of  Seville,  and  urged  him  to  use  every  means  in  his  power 
to  this  end,  since  it  would  be  for  the  service  of  God  and  of  himself,  and 
for  the  good  of  his  people. 

Bras  Neto's  task  proved  to  be  one  of  considerable  difficulty.  One 
Cardinal,  the  Florentine  Lorenzo  Pucci,  declared  roundly  that  no 
Inquisition  was  needed,  and  that  it  was  only  a  plan  to  fleece  the 
Jews  ;  and  his  nephew,  Antonio,  who  succeeded  him  as  Cardinal, 
proved  little  more  tractable.  The  Jews  themselves  had  always  been 
influential  with  the  Curia,  and  they  resisted  strenuously.  Bras  Neto 
found  that,  for  his  purpose,  heresy  was  a  better  name  to  conjure 
with  than  Judaism  ;  and  he  did  not  fail  to  press  the  necessitj^  for 
the  Inquisition  as  a  safeguard  against  it.  At  length  he  succeeded, 
and  on  December  17, 1531,  the  Bull  Cum  ad  nihil  was  signed,  which 
provided  for  the  inauguration  of  the  Inquisition  at  Lisbon.  The 
reasons  given  were  that  some  of  the  novos  cristaos  were  returning  to 
the  rites  of  their  Jewish  forefathers,  that  certain  Christians  were 
Judaising,  and  that  others  were  following  "  the  Lutheran  and  other 
damnable  heresies  and  errors  "  or  practising  magical  arts.  These  reasons 
were,  as  Herculano  has  said,  "  in  part  false,  in  part  misleading,  and  in 
part  ridiculous  " :  there  were  no  Lutherans  in  Portugal ;  the  novos  cristaos 
had  as  yet  given  no  trouble  there  ;  and  the  Christians  of  Portugal  were 
no  more  inclined  to  Judaism,  and  less  inclined  to  magic,  than  those  of 
other  parts  of  Europe.  But  the  allegations  had  served  their  purpose.  On 
January  13, 1532,  a  brief  was  dispatched  to  Frey  Diogo  da  Silva,  the  King's 
confessor,  expediting  the  Bull  and  nominating  him  as  Inquisitor-General; 
and  it  looked  as  if  the  question  was  ended.  As  a  matter  of  fact  it  was 
hardly  begun.  For  now  began  a  series  of  intrigues  and  counter-intrigues 
on  the  matter,  now  one  side  getting  the  best  of  it  and  now  the  other. 
The  brave  knight  Duarte  de  Paz,  who  was  the  agent  for  the  Jews, 
worked  for  them  with  a  zeal  and  vigour  restrained  only  by  the  fact  that 
he  was  a  Portuguese  subject.  The  King  more  than  once  procured  laws 
which  placed  the  Jews  at  the  mercy  of  his  subjects,  and  then  had  to 
withdraw  them.  Money,  promises,  threats,  were  freely  expended  on  both 
sides.     Herculano  calculates  that  between  February,  1531,  when  the 


414  Negotiations  with  tlte  Papacy  [1532-47 

matter  was  first  opened,  and  July,  1547,  when  it  was  finally  settled,  over 
two  million  cruzados  (or  nearl}^  £300,000)  were  paid  by  the  King  to  the 
Papacy,  without  counting  gifts  to  individual  Cardinals.  And  since  the 
Jews  disbursed  money  even  more  freely,  it  is  clear  that  one  party  at  any 
rate  was  the  gainer  by  the  negotiations. 

To  trace  the  changes  in  detail.  On  October  17, 1532,  a  brief  was  issued 
suspending  the  Bull  of  December  17,  1531.  On  April  7,  1533,  this  was 
followed  up  by  a  Bull  which  divided  the  novos  cristaos  into  two  classes, 
those  who  had  received  baptism  by  compulsion  and  those  who  had  been 
baptized  voluntarily  or  in  infancy  :  the  former  are  not  bound  to  observe 
the  laws  of  the  Church,  the  latter  are,  but  their  past  failures  are  con- 
doned. The  King  was  very  angry  at  this  amnesty  and  directed  his  agents 
to  suggest  various  alternatives,  one  being  that  the  Jews  should  be  shipped 
to  Africa  so  as  to  be  interposed  between  Christians  and  Moors.  But 
Clement  VII  did  not  waver.  On  April  2, 1534,  he  dispatched  a  dignified 
brief  to  Dom  Joao,  saying  that  he  was  not  bound  to  give  reasons  for  his 
action,  but  that  he  would  do  so  as  an  act  of  grace  ;  and  he  proceeded 
to  give  his  reasons  with  admirable  clearness.  Not  long  afterwards  he 
died.  His  successor  Paul  III  seemed  more  tractable  at  first.  But 
he  would  not  withdraw  the  pardon,  even  when  Dom  Joao  threatened 
to  renounce  the  papal  obedience  like  the  King  of  England.  At  length 
however,  at  the  desire  of  Charles  V,  Paul  agreed  to  the  setting-up  of  the 
Inquisition  ;  and  it  was  again  provided  for  by  a  Bull  of  May  23,  1536. 
But  the  matter  did  not  end  here,  and  it  was  not  until  July  16, 1547,  that 
the  precise  extent  of  the  amnesty  was  settled  and  the  Inquisition  finally 
established. 

Even  when  it  v/as  established  it  had  very  little  to  do  with  heresy 
properly  so  called.  A  few  writings,  for  instance  those  of  Antonio  Pereira 
Marramaque,  who  insisted  upon  the  duty  of  translating  the  Bible,  were 
placed  on  the  Portuguese  Index  ;  but  it  was  far  more  largely  concerned 
with  foreign  works  than  with  those  of  natives.  A  considerable  number 
of  foreign  students  or  traders  came  under  its  influence  ;  for  instance,  the 
Scottish  poet  George  Buchanan  (1548  <?.)  and  the  Englishmen  William 
Gardiner  and  Mark  Burgess.  Even  the  records  of  the  foreign  Church  at 
Geneva,  so  largely  recruited  from  Spain  and  Italy,  only  supply  some  five 
or  six  Portuguese  names.  So  that  Damiao  de  Goes  remains  the  one 
Portuguese  heretic  of  distinction  during  this  period. 

Damiao  was  born  about  1501  of  a  noble  family,  went  to  Antwerp 
about  1523,  and  spent  six  years  there  in  study.  Then  he  travelled  in 
the  north,  and  returned  by  way  of  Germany,  passing  through  Miinster  to 
Freiburg,  where  he  stayed  some  months  with  Erasmus,  and  had  long 
conferences  with  him.  After  this  he  was  in  Italy  from  1534  to  1538, 
with  one  short  interval,  during  which  he  came  to  Basel  to  tend  Erasmus, 
who  died  in  his  arms  on  the  night  of  July  11-12,  1536.  In  1537,  at 
the  desire  of  Sadoleto,  he  began  a  correspondence  with  the  Reformers  at 


1538-72]  Damiao  de  Goes  415 

Wittenberg,  in  the  hope  of  bringing  them  back  to  the  Church.  He  was 
at  Louvain  in  1538,  and  after  fighting  on  the  side  of  Flanders  and  being 
for  two  years  a  prisoner  of  war,  he  at  length  returned  to  Portugal  in 
1545.  He  was  almost  immediately  denounced  to  the  Inquisition,  but  as 
the  charges  were  vague  and  the  Inquisitor-General  his  friend,  he  was  set 
free,  and  soon  after  was  aj^pointed  royal  archivist  and  historiographer. 
In  1550  a  second  denunciation  was  made  by  Simao  Rodrigues,  a  Jesuit 
who  had  known  him  in  Italy  ;  it  was  more  precise  and  therefore  more 
dangerous,  but  although  he  was  vehemently  suspected  the  charges  fell 
through.  More  than  twenty  years  later,  however,  the  charges  were  again 
disinterred.  He  was  brought  before  the  judge  Diogo  da  Fonseca,  on 
April  4,  1571,  and  remanded  ;  and  the  old  man  of  seventy  remained  in 
prison  for  twenty  months  while  the  charges  were  being  investigated. 
He  frankly  confessed  that  he  had  been  remiss  in  the  performance  of  his 
religious  duties,  and  that  he  had  held  certain  points  of  doctrine  which 
were  then  held  by  many  great  theologians,  and  were  only  subsequently 
made  unlawful  by  the  Council  of  Trent.  This,  he  said,  was  between 
1581  and  1537  ;  and  against  it  he  set  more  than  thirty  years  of  blameless 
life.  Nevertheless,  he  was  sentenced  to  perpetual  imprisonment.  Here 
the  King  interfered,  commuted  the  punishment,  and  sent  him  on  December 
16,  1572,  to  perform  his  penance  in  the  monastery  of  Batalha.  We  do 
not  know  when  he  returned  to  his  own  home  ;  but  he  died  there  not 
long  afterwards  of  an  accident  —  a  judgment,  as  people  said. 

Such  then  was  the  work  of  the  Portuguese  Inquisition  during  this 
period  in  its  relation  to  heresy.  It  was  founded  for  reasons  ostensibly 
religious,  but  actually  fiscal  ;  and  although  when  once  established  it  made 
Protestantism  impossible  in  Portugal,  there  is  nothing  to  suggest  that 
the  movement  for  Reform  would  have  found  many  adherents  there  had 
there  been  no  Inquisition. 


CHAPTER   XIII 

HENRY  VIII 
1519-1547 

On  his  election  to  the  Empire  Charles  became  a  much  greater 
potentate  in  the  eyes  of  all,  and,  as  he  was  also  the  Queen  of  England's 
nephew,  there  were  manifest  reasons  for  England  to  desire  his  friend- 
ship. On  the  other  hand,  the  close  alliance  of  France,  which  Wolsey 
had  twice  succeeded  in  securing,  however  beneficial  to  England,  was 
exceedingly  unpopular.  It  had  scarcely  been  contracted  when  efforts 
were  made  to  undermine  it  ;  and  soon  a  strong  party  at  Court,  headed 
by  the  Queen  herself,  endeavoured  to  prevent  the  French  interview, 
which  had  been  arranged  for  April  1, 1519,  from  taking  effect.  The  new 
Emperor,  equally  desirous  to  counteract,  if  he  could  not  prevent,  the  meet- 
ing, agreed  to  visit  England  on  his  way  from  Spain  to  Germany.  Matters, 
however,  had  to  be  arranged  beforehand,  and  though  the  anti-French 
party  contrived  to  put  off  the  visit  to  Francis  till  June,  1520,  it  was  only 
in  April  of  that  year  that  the  imperial  ambassador  in  England  succeeded 
in  concluding  a  specific  treat}^  It  was  settled  that  the  Emperor  should, 
if  possible,  land  at  Sandwich  in  May  just  before  the  King  went  to  France, 
or,  if  he  failed  to  do  so,  should  have  a  meeting  with  Henry  at  Gravelines 
after  the  French  interview.  He  actually  landed  on  May  26,  at  Dover, 
barely  in  time  for  a  very  hurried  visit.  Next  day,  which  happened  to 
be  Whitsunday,  the  King  conducted  him  to  Canterbury,  where  he  was 
introduced  to  the  Queen,  his  aunt,  and  attended  service  in  the  Cathedral. 
On  the  31st  he  had  to  embark  again  for  Flanders,  in  order  that  Henry 
might  fulfil  his  engagement  with  Francis.  But  a  further  meeting  at 
Gravelines  after  the  French  interview  was  promised. 

Wolsey  meanwhile  had  taken  care  that  this  French  interview  should 
not  be  a  failure.  A  great  deal  of  negotiation,  indeed,  had  been  found 
necessary  ;  but  Francis,  to  facilitate  matters,  at  last  put  all  the  arrange- 
ments under  Wolsey's  control,  so  that  they  advanced  rapidly.  The 
King  crossed  from  Calais  to  Dover  the  same  day  that  the  Emperor 
embarked  from  Sandwich.     At  Guines  on  June  6  he  signed  a  treaty 

416 


1520-1]     Royal  meetings. — Execution  of  Buckingham     417 

of  which  the  counterpart  was  signed  by  Francis  the  same  day  at 
Ardres,  partly  bearing  on  the  prospective  marriage  of  Mary  and  the 
Dauphin,  partly  framed  to  secure  French  intervention  in  disputes  with 
Scotland  in  a  form  which  should  give  England  satisfaction.  The  inter- 
view took  place  on  the  7th,  in  a  spot  between  the  English  castle  of 
Guines  and  the  French  castle  of  Ardres.  The  scene,  magnificent 
beyond  all  precedent,  even  in  that  age  of  glitter,  was  called,  from  the 
splendour  of  the  tents  and  apparel,  the  Field  of  Cloth  of  Gold ;  and 
tiie  mutual  visits  and  festivities  continued  till  the  24th,  when  the  two 
Kings  separated. 

Nothing  could  have  appeared  more  cordial,  and  the  world  was  for 
some  time  under  the  impression  that  the  alliance  between  England  and 
France  was  now  more  firmly  knit  than  ever.  And  yet,  immediately  after- 
Avards,the  King  with  Queen  Catharine  proceeded  by  agreement  to  another 
meeting  with  the  Emperor  at  Gravelines,  which  took  place  on  July  10. 
On  the  14th  at  Calais  a  secret  treaty  was  signed,  binding  both  Henry 
and  the  Emperor  to  make  no  further  arrangements  with  France  giving 
effect  either  to  the  marriage  of  the  Dauphin  with  Mary  or  to  that  of 
Charles  himself  with  the  French  King's  davTghter  Charlotte  —  a  match 
to  which  he  was  bound  by  the  Treaty  of  Noyon.  Indeed,  there  is 
no  doubt  that  in  their  secret  conferences  both  at  Canterbury  and  at 
Calais,  the  project  had  been  discussed  of  setting  aside  agreements  with 
France  by  both  parties  and  marrying  the  Emperor  to  the  Princess 
Mary.  Of  these  perfidious  compacts  Francis  was,  of  course,  not  directly 
informed ;  but  he  was  not  to  be  persuaded  that  the  two  meetings 
with  the  Emperor,  before  and  after  the  interview,  were  mere  matters 
of  courtesy.  He  felt,  however,  that  it  would  be  impolitic  to  display 
resentment.     The  Emperor  was  crowned  at  Aachen  on  October  23. 

In  April,  1521,  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  was  summoned  from 
Gloucestershire  to  the  King's  presence,  and  on  his  arrival  in  London 
was  charged  with  treason.  Information  had  been  given  against  him  of 
various  incautious  expressions  tending  to  show  that,  being  of  the  blood 
of  Lancaster,  he  had  some  expectation  of  succeeding  to  the  Crown,  the 
fulfilment  of  which  events  might  hasten ;  also,  that,  should  he  succeed, 
Wolsey  and  Sir  Thomas  Lovel  would  be  beheaded ;  and  further,  that  if 
he  had  been  arrested  on  an  occasion  when  the  King  had  been  displeased 
with  him,  he  would  have  tried,  as  his  father  had  with  Richard  III,  to  get 
access  to  the  King's  presence  and  would  then  have  stabbed  him.  That 
this  testimony  was  strongly  coloured  by  malice,  there  is  little  doubt.  But 
the  Duke  had  a  formal  trial  before  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  as  High  Steward, 
and  was  found  guilty  by  seventeen  of  his  peers.  He  was  beheaded  on 
Tower  Hill  on  May  17,  to  the  general  regret  of  the  people. 

At  this  time  Francis  I  had  stirred  up  war  against  the  Emperor,  who 
was  already  perplexed  with  a  rebellion  in  Spain,  while  occupied  in 
Germany  with  Luther  and  the  Diet  of  Worms.     Charles,  hard  pressed, 


418  Wolse?/  and  Charles  V  [1521-2 

was  willing  to  accept  Henry's  mediation,  and  the  French,  after  some 
reverses  for  which  their  early  success  had  not  prepared  them,  were  glad  to 
accept  it  also.  But  the  Imperialists  changed  their  tone  with  the  change  of 
fortune,  and  demanded  Henry's  aid  by  the  treaty  of  London  against  the 
aggressor.  Wolsey  was  sent  to  Calais  to  hear  deputies  of  both  sides 
and  adjust  the  differences.  On  opening  the  conference,  he  found  the 
Imperialists  intractable ;  they  had  no  power  to  treat,  only  to  demand 
aid  of  England.  But  Wolsey,  they  said,  might  visit  the  Emperor 
himself,  who  was  then  at  Bruges,  to  discuss  matters.  This  strange 
proceeding,  as  State-papers  show,  had  been  certainly  planned  between 
Wolsej-  and  the  Imperialists  beforehand  ;  and  the  Cardinal  suspended 
the  conference,  making  plausible  excuses  to  the  French,  while  he  went 
to  the  Emperor  at  Bruges  and  concluded  with  him  a  secret  treaty 
against  France  on  August  25.  It  would  seem,  however,  that  the  terms 
of  this  treaty  were  the  subject  of  prolonged  discussion  before  it  was 
concluded ;  and  Wolsey,  instead  of  being  only  eight  days  absent  from 
Calais,  as  he  told  the  Frenchmen  he  would  be,  was  away  for  nearly  three 
weeks.  He  had  successfully  contended,  among  other  things,  that  if  a 
suspension  of  hostilities  could  be  obtained  in  the  meantime,  England 
should  not  be  bound  to  declare  war  against  France  till  March,  1523.  On 
his  return  to  Calais  he  laboured  hard  to  bring  about  this  suspension,  but 
in  vain.  The  capture  of  Fuenterrabia  by  the  French  in  October,  and  their 
refusal  to  restore  it,  or  even  to  put  it  into  the  hands  of  England  for 
a  time  as  security,  finally  wrecked  the  conference,  and  Wolsey  returned 
to  England  in  November.  His  health  had  given  way  at  times  during 
these  proceedings,  and  he  was  certainly  disappointed  at  the  result.  But 
he  was  rewarded  by  the  King  with  the  abbey  of  St  Alban's  in  addition 
to  his  other  preferments. 

Pope  Leo  X  died  on  December  2  following.  Charles  V  had 
promised  Wolsey  at  Bruges  that  on  the  first  vacancy  of  the  papal  chair 
he  would  do  his  best  to  make  him  Pope,  and  the  King  sent  Pace  to 
Rome  to  help  to  procure  his  election.  The  Emperor  wrote  to  Wolsey 
that  he  had  not  forgotten  his  promise,  but  he  certainly  did  not  keep  it, 
and  in  January,  1522,  Adrian  VI  was  elected.  It  may  be  doubted 
whether  Wolsey  was  much  disappointed ;  but  he  knew  now  what 
reliance  to  place  on  a  promise  of  Charles  V.  On  February  2  he  and 
the  papal  ambassador  presented  to  the  King  the  deceased  Pope's  Bull 
bestowing  upon  him  the  title  of  Defender  of  the  Faith,  in  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  service  he  had  done  the  Church  by  writing  a  book  against 
Luther. 

Henry  had  been  more  eager  to  take  part  with  the  Emperor  than 
Wolsey  thought  prudent.  Charles  now^  required  a  loan  and  claimed 
from  Henry  fulfilment  of  a  promise  of  the  pay  of  3000  men  in  the 
Netherlands.  He  was  already  in  Henry's  debt ;  but  Wolsey  was  disposed 
to  allow  him  a  further  advance  of  100,000  crowns  on  condition  that  the 


1521-2]    Charles  V  in  England. — Alhariy  in  Scotland     419 

King  should  not  be  called  on  to  declare  openly  against  Francis  till  the 
money  was  refunded.  This  did  not  suit  Charles  at  all,  and  he  hastened 
on  another  visit  which  he  was  to  pay  to  Henry  on  his  way  back  to 
Spain,  and  arrived  at  Dover  again  in  1522  on  May  26  —  the  very 
day  of  his  landing  there  two  years  before.  He  was  feasted  and  enter- 
tained even  more  than  he  cared  for  at  Greenwich,  London,  and  Windsor, 
at  which  last  place  on  June  19  he  bound  himself  by  a  new  treaty 
to  marry  Mary  when  she  had  completed  her  twelfth  year.  But  he 
secured  a  further  loan  of  50,000  crowns,  and  had  the  satisfaction,  during 
his  stay,  of  seeing  Henry  committed  to  immediate  war  with  France  by 
an  open  declaration  of  hostility,  which  the  English  herald  Clarencieux 
made  to  Francis  at  Lyons  on  May  29.  On  July  2  a  further  treaty 
was  concluded  for  the  conduct  of  the  war,  and  on  the  6th  the  Emperor 
sailed  from  Southampton.  Just  before  his  departure  he  gave  Wolsey  a 
patent  for  a  pension  of  2500  ducats  on  vacant  bishoprics  in  Spain,  and 
guaranteed  him  the  continuance  of  another  pension  which  Francis  had 
hitherto  paid  him  in  recompense  for  the  bishopric  of  Tournay,  that 
city  having  surrendered  to  the  Imperialists  on  December  1.  But 
Spanish  pensions  were  commonly  in  arrear,  and  that  charged  on  the 
Spanish  bishoprics  was  only  in  lieu  of  one  specifically  charged  on  the 
see  of  Badajoz,  which  the  Emperor  had  already  granted  to  Wolsey  in 
1520.  Nor  was  Charles  at  all  ready  at  any  time,  when  called  upon, 
to  pay  his  debts  to  the  King  himself. 

It  was  no  surprise  to  Francis  when  England  declared  war  against 
him.  As  a  means  of  keeping  Henry  in  check,  he  had  again  let  Albany 
find  his  way  to  Scotland  while  the  Calais  conferences  were  still  going  on 
in  1521.  He  pretended  that  he  had  not  connived  at  Albany's  escape,  and 
he  made  a  show  of  urging  him  to  return;  but  he  meant  to  make  use  of  him 
in  Scotland.  Albany,  on  his  arrival,  desired  of  Henry  a  prolongation  of 
the  truce  between  the  two  kingdoms,  in  which  France  should  be  included. 
Evidently  France  was  so  impoverished  by  taxation  that  she  would  have 
been  glad  to  stave  off  war  by  any  means.  But  Henry  would  hear  nothing 
about  prolonging  the  truce  Avhile  Albany  was  in  Scotland  ;  and  he  wrote 
to  the  Estates  of  that  country  in  January,  1522,  not  to  allow  him  to 
remain  there,  seeing  that  he  had  escaped  from  France  surreptitiously 
and  his  presence  was  not  even  safe  for  their  King.  This  was  just 
what  Henry  had  told  them  before ;  but  it  was  a  stranger  plea  to  urge 
than  formerly;  for  this  time  Queen  Margaret,  James  V's  own  mother, 
had  solicited  Albany's  return.  She,  indeed,  had  found  it  hard  to  live 
amid  a  factious  nobility,  especially  as  she  had  been  neglected  by  her  own 
husband,  from  whom  she  was  now  seeking  a  divorce.  But  Henry  had 
small  regard  for  his  sister's  good  name,  and  insinuated  that  it  was 
Albany  who  had  tried  to  separate  her  from  her  husband,  with  the 
intention  of  marrying  her  himself.  Such  a  charge  was  scarcely  even 
plausible,  for  Albany  had  a  wife  then  living,  with  whom,  as  he  told  the 


420  Sarrty  invades  France. — Albany  foiled         [1521 


English  herald,  he  was  perfectly  ^atistied.  The  Estates  of  Scotland 
made  a  very  temperate  but  firm  reply,  saying  they  were  prepared  to 
live  and  die  with  their  Governor,  while  both  Margaret  and  Albany 
repelled  the  shameful  insinuations  against  them,  certainly  not  with 
greater  vehemence  than  the  case  deserved.  Henry  then  sent  a  fleet 
to  the  Firth  of  Forth,  and  some  raids  into  Scotland  took  place,  in 
which  Kelso  was  partly  burned. 

As  to  France,  so  soon  after  the  declaration  of  war  as  the  wind  would 
serve  and  bad  victualling  arrangements  permit,  a  force  under  the  Earl  of 
Surrey  as  Lord  Admiral  sailed  from  Southampton,  and  on  July  1  sacked 
and  burned  the  town  of  Morlaix  in  Britanny,  setting  fire  to  the  shipping 
in  the  harbour.  It  then  returned  with  a  rich  booty  to  the  Solent  ; 
for  the  merchants  of  Morlaix  had  stores  of  linen  cloths.  There  was 
also  some  desultory  fighting  about  Calais  and  Boulogne  ;  but  nothing 
noteworthy  was  done  till  September,  when  Surrey,  now  the  commander 
of  an  invading  force,  in  co-operation  with  an  imperial  army,  burned  and 
destroyed  with  great  barbarity  a  number  of  places  in  Picardy.  Hesdin 
also  was  besieged,  and  the  town  much  injured  ;  but  it  was  found  difficult 
to  assault  the  castle,  and  the  besiegers  withdrew.  The  season  was  wet, 
the  artillery  difficult  to  move,  and  the  understanding  between  the  allies 
not  altogether  satisfactory.  Surrey's  empty  victories  won  him  great 
applause  in  England  ;  but  he  returned  to  Calais  in  October. 

Meantime  the  Scots  had  created  some  alarm.  In  May,  for  want  of 
French  support,  Albany  had  been  on  the  point  of  withdrawing  from  the 
country  and  letting  peace  be  made,  when  some  slender  succours  came  ; 
moreover,  the  English  raids  called  for  retribution.  Albany  advanced 
to  the  borders  at  the  head  of  a  very  numerous  army,  intending  to 
invade  England  on  September  2.  Though  the  design  was  known 
even  in  July,  when  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury  was  appointed  lieutenant- 
general  of  an  army  to  be  sent  against  Scotland,  the  borders  were  ill 
prepared  to  resist,  and  Carlisle,  against  which  Albany's  great  host  was 
directed,  was  defenceless.  But  Lord  Dacre,  Warden  of  the  Marches,  was 
equal  to  the  emergency.  Towards  the  close  of  August  he  sent  secret 
messages  to  Albany,  which  led  to  negotiations,  though  he  acknoAvledged 
that  he  had  no  powers  to  treat  ;  and  he  appealed  to  Margaret  to  use  her 
influence  for  peace,  which  would  become  more  hopeless  than  ever  between 
the  kingdoms  if  arrangements  were  not  made  at  once.  He  effectually 
concealed  the  weakness  of  his  own  position,  and  caused  the  enemy  to 
waste  time  till,  at  length,  on  September  11,  Albany  agreed  with  him 
for  one  month's  abstinence  from  war,  and  disbanded  his  army.  Wolsey 
was  much  relieved,  and  Dacre  was  thanked  for  his  astuteness.  It  was  in 
vain,  now,  that  Albany  in  further  negotiations  pressed  for  the  compre- 
hension of  France  ;  and  he  sailed  again  for  that  country  in  October, 
leaving  a  Council  of  Regency  in  Scotland,  and  promising  to  return  in 
the  following  August. 


1523]       A  loan  and  a  subside/. — Suffolk  in  France        421 

Much  money  was  wanted  for  the  French  war.  Wolsey  had  not  only 
levied  from  the  City  of  London  a  loan  of  £20,000,  but  afterwards,  on 
August  20,  had  sent  for  the  mayor  and  chief  citizens  to  inform  them 
that  commissioners  were  appointed  over  all  the  countr}^  to  swear  every 
man  to  the  value  of  his  moveable  property,  of  which  it  was  thought  that 
everyone  should  give  a  tenth  ;  and  though  some  had  already  contributed 
to  the  loan  as  much  as  a  fifth  of  tlieir  goods,  they  were  told  that  the 
loan  would  only  be  allowed  as  part  of  the  tenth  to  be  exacted  from  the 
whole  city.  Nor  was  even  thisenough  ;  for  Parliament,  which  had  not  met 
for  more  than  seven  years,  was  called  in  April,  1523,  expressly  for  further 
supplies.  A  subsidy  of  X  800,000  was  demanded,  for  which  the  Commons 
were  asked  to  impose  a  property  tax  of  four  shillings  in  the  pound  on  every 
man's  goods  and  lands.  Sir  Thomas  More,  who  was  elected  Speaker, 
backed  up  the  demand,  but  it  was  resisted  as  imjjossible.  There  was  not 
coin,  it  was  said,  out  of  the  King's  hands  in  all  the  realm  to  pay  it. 
Cardinal  Wolsey  came  down  to  the  House,  and  would  have  discussed  the 
matter  ;  but  the  Commons  pleaded  their  privileges,  and  he  contented 
himself  with  setting  before  them  evidences  of  the  increased  prosperity  of 
the  country,  and  withdrew.  After  long  debate  a  grant  was  made  of 
two  shillings  in  the  pound,  pa3-able  in  two  years,  on  every  man's  lands  or 
goods  who  was  worth  £20,  with  smaller  rates  on  men  of  inferior  means. 
But  Wolsey  insisted  that  this  was  not  enough,  and  ultimately  further 
grants  were  made  of  one  shilling  in  the  pound  on  landed  property,  to  be 
paid  in  three  years,  and  one  shilling  in  the  pound  on  goods,  to  be  paid 
in  the  fourth  year.  The  amount  was  unprecedented.  The  Parliament 
sat  continuously,  except  for  a  break  at  Whitsuntide,  till  August  13, 
when  it  was  dissolved.  The  clergy  were  also  taxed  at  the  same  time 
through  their  convocations,  that  of  Canterbury  meeting  at  first  at  St 
Paul's,  and  that  of  York  under  Wolsey  at  Westminster  ;  an  attempt 
of  Wolsey  to  induce  them  to  resolve  themselves  into  a  single  national 
synod  failed.  They  were  permitted  to  vote  their  money  in  the  usual 
way  ;  and,  after  much  opposition,  a  grant  was  made  of  half  a  year's 
revenue  from  all  benefices,  payable  in  five  years. 

The  war,  which  had  languished  somewhat  since  Surrey's  invasion  of 
France,  was  now  renewed  with  greater  vigour.  In  August  the  Duke  of 
Suffolk  was  appointed  Captain-general  of  a  new  invading  army  —  a  larger 
one,  it  was  said,  than  had  sailed  from  England  for  a  hundred  years. 
France  was  not  only  in  great  poverty  but  was  now  isolated.  Scotland 
could  not  help  her,  and  her  old  ally,  Venice,  had  turned  against  her,  not 
being  allowed  to  remain  neutral.  Moreover,  Henry  was  calculating  on 
the  disaffection  of  the  Duke  of  Bourbon,  with  whom  both  he  and  the 
Emperor  hadbeenfor  some  time  secretly  in  communication.  In  September 
the  Duke's  sudden  defection  took  Francis  by  surprise,  and  compelled  him 
to  desist  from  conducting  personally  a  new  expedition  into  Italy.  Mean- 
while Suffolk,  having  crossed  the  Channel,  was  joined  by  a  considerable 


422  Albany's  last  visit  to  Scotland  [1523 

force  under  Count  van  Buren,  not,  however,  well  provided  with  waggons 
and  means  of  transport,  while  France  was  harassed  elsewhere  by  the 
Imperialists.  But  the  invading  armies  were  weakened  by  divided 
counsels  ;  a  plan  of  besieging  Boulogne  was  given  up,  and  the  allies  only 
devastated  Picardy,  took  Bray  by  assault,  and  compelled  Ancre  and 
Montdidier  to  surrender.  It  was  reported  in  England  that  Suffolk  was 
on  his  way  to  Paris,  and,  that  he  might  have  the  means  to  follow  up 
his  advantages,  commissions  were  issued  on  November  2  to  press  all 
over  England  for  what  was  called  an  "  anticipation,"  that  is  to  say,  for 
payment  by  those  possessed  of  X40  in  lands  or  goods  of  the  first  assess- 
ment of  the  subsidy,  before  the  term  when  it  was  legally  due.  The 
money  was  gathered  in.  But  before  the  month  of  November  was  out, 
Buren  had  disbanded  his  forces,  and  Suffolk  had  returned  to  Calais. 
A  severe  frost  had  produced  intense  suffering,  and  it  was  found  im- 
possible to  preserve  discipline.  The  King  had  determined  to  send  over 
Lord  Mountjoy  with  reinforcements ;  but,  before  he  could  be  sent,  the 
English  troops  had  taken  their  own  way  home  through  Flanders,  and 
many  of  them  shipped  at  Antwerp,  Sluys,  and  Nieuport. 

Meantime,  though  later  than  he  promised,  eluding  English  efforts  to 
intercept  him,  Albany  had  again  crossed  the  sea  to  Scotland.  During 
all  the  time  of  his  absence  Henry  had  persistently  tried  to  under- 
mine his  influence  and  weaken  the  Scotch  alliance  with  France.  For 
this  it  was  not  difficult  to  make  further  use  of  Margaret,  who,  in  the 
hope  of  seeing  her  old  authority  restored,  was  soon  persua'ded  once 
more  to  desert  Albany.  A  truce  had  been  arranged  with  the  lords 
without  reference  to  him,  and  Albany  in  France  took  serious  alarm  at 
rumours  that  Henry  had  been  negotiating  to  keep  him  permanentl}-  out 
of  Scotland  with  the  suggestion  of  marrying  James  to  the  Princess  Mary. 
But  the  truce  was  allowed  to  expire  in  February,  when  Surrey  was 
appointed  lieutenant-general  of  the  army  against  Scotland,  and  under 
his  direction  the  Marquis  of  Dorset,  who  was  appointed  Warden  of  the 
East  Marches,  invaded  Teviotdale  in  April,  1523.  A  series  of  further 
invasions  was  kept  up  all  through  the  summer,  and,  just  when  Albany 
returned  in  September,  Surrey  succeeded  in  laying  Jedburgh  in  ashes  — 
till  then  a  great  fortified  town  more  populous  than  Berwick.  He  met, 
however,  witli  a  most  obstinate  resistance,  and  was  thrown  on  the 
defensive  when  Alban}^  immediately  on  his  arrival,  prepared  to  invade 
in  his  turn.  Knowing  the  weakness  of  Berwick  and  the  strength  of 
Albany's  reinforcements,  Surrey  was  seriously  alarmed.  But  Wolsey 
had  reason  for  believing  his  fears  to  be  exaggerated,  as  the  event  proved 
them  to  be.  Encumbered  by  heavy  artillery  Albany  moved  slowly,  and 
at  last  laid  siege  to  Wark  Castle  on  November  1.  The  fortress  seemed 
in  real  danger,  the  outer  works  being  actually  won  ;  but  the  garrison 
made  a  gallant  defence,  and  next  day,  as  Surrey  was  coming  to  the 
rescue,  Albany  suddenly  gave  up  the  siege,  and  returned  to  Edinburgh. 


1524-5]  Papal  election. — War  iiiFrance. — BattleofPavia  423 

His  mysterious  retreat  was  branded  by  the  English  as  a  shameful 
flight,  and  satirised  in  contemptuous  verse  by  Skelton,  the  poet 
laureate.  But  the  truth  seems  to  be  that  several  of  the  Scotch 
lords  deprecated  a  policy  of  invasion  as  being  only  in  the  interest  of 
France.  Albany's  influence  was  clearly  on  the  wane  ;  for  next  year 
he  met  a  Parliament  in  May,  and  again  obtained  leave  for  a  brief 
visit  to  France  on  the  understanding  that  if  he  did  not  return  in 
August  his  authority  was  at  an  end.  He  left  immediately  and  never 
returned  again. 

Meanwhile,  on  the  death  of  Adrian  VI  in  September,  1523,  Charles  V 
again  promised  with  the  same  insincerity  as  before  to  advance  Wolsey's 
candidature  for  the  papacy  as  advantageous  alike  to  England  and 
himself.  But  on  November  19  Giuliano  de'  Medici,  a  great  friend  of 
both  princes,  was  elected  as  Clement  VII.  He  soon  after  confirmed 
for  life  Wolsey's  legatine  authority,  which  at  first  had  been  only  tem- 
porary but  had  been  prolonged  from  time  to  time. 

In  1524  the  war  made  little  progress  after  February,  when  the 
Emperor  recovered  Fuenterrabia  ;  all  parties  were  exhausted.  But  little 
came  of  the  mission  of  a  Nuncio  (Nicholas  von  Schomberg,  Archbishop 
of  Capua),  whom  the  Pope  sent  to  France,  Spain,  and  England  suc- 
cessively to  mediate  a  peace.  Negotiations  went  on  with  Bourbon  on 
the  part  both  of  the  Emperor  and  Henry  for  a  joint  attack  on  France. 
But  the  King  and  Wolsey  had  long  suspected  the  Emperor's  sincerity, 
and  were  determined  that  there  should  be  either  peace  or  war  in  earnest. 
Bourbon  invaded  Provence,  and  laid  siege  to  Marseilles  ;  whereupon 
orders  were  issued  in  England,  September  10,  to  prepare  for  a  royal 
invasion  in  aid  of  the  Duke.  The  siege  of  Marseilles,  in  itself,  was 
entirely  in  the  Emperor's  interest ;  no  English  army  crossed  the  Channel, 
and  Bourbon  was  forced  to  abandon  the  enterprise. 

Henry,  in  the  meantime,  had  been  feeling  his  way  to  a  separate  peace 
with  France,  in  case  the  Emperor  showed  himself  remiss  in  fulfilling  his 
engagements.  In  June  a  Genoese  merchant,  Giovanni  Joachino  Passano, 
came  over  to  London,  as  if  on  ordinary  business.  He  was  soon  known 
to  be  an  agent  of  Louise  of  Savoy,  the  French  King's  mother,  who  had 
been  left  Regent  in  her  son's  absence.  His  stay  in  England  was 
unpopular  with  the  English,  but  his  secret  negotiations  with  Wolsey 
were  disavowed,  and  in  January,  1525,  another  French  agent,  Brinon, 
President  of  Rouen,  joined  him  in  London. 

Francis,  seeing  how  matters  lay,  made  a  sudden  descent  into  Italy 
and  recovered  Milan,  which  he  had  lost  in  the  spring.  But  the  pro- 
tracted siege  of  Pavia  ended  with  the  defeat  and  capture  of  the 
French  King,  which  seemed  to  throw  everything  into  the  Emperor's 
hands,  and  it  was  not  likely  that  he  would  share  with  his  allies  the  fruits 
of  his  victory.  Wolsey,  however,  had  been  ordering  matters  so  as  to 
secure  his  master's  interests,  whether  the  French  should  succeed  or  fail 


424  Negotiations  with  the  Emperor  [i;»25 

in  Italy  ;  and  just  before  the  news  of  the  battle  reached  England  he  had 
taken  a  most  extraordinar}^  step  to  cover  his  communications  with  the 
French  agent.  A  watchman  arrested  one  night  a  messenger  of  de  Praet, 
the  Imperial  ambassador,  as  a  suspicious  character.  His  letters  were 
taken  and  brought  to  Wolsey,  who  tirst  opened  and  read  them,  then 
sent  for  the  ambassador  and  upbraided  him  for  the  terms  (very  un- 
complimentary, certainly,  to  himself)  in  which  he  had  dared  to  write 
to  his  own  sovereign.  The  King  himself  followed  this  up  by  a  letter 
to  the  Emperor,  desiring  him  to  punish  de  Praet  as  a  mischief-maker 
trying  to  disturb  the  cordialit}^  between  them  ;  and  Charles,  afraid 
to  alienate  Henry,  made  only  a  mild  remonstrance  against  the 
insult. 

Just  after  this  occurrence,  and  before  news  had  yet  arrived  of  the 
great  event  at  Pa  via,  an  important  embassy  came  over  from  Flanders, 
from  the  Emperor's  aunt,  Margaret  of  Savoy.  The  situation  iu-Ital}^ 
was  then  so  doubtful,  and  the  Imperial  forces  there  so  distressed  for 
want  of  means,  that  England  was  to  be  urged  to  send  a  large  army  over 
sea  to  create  a  diversion  by  a  new  joint  attack  on  the  North  of  France. 
Another  request  was,  that  the  Princess  Mary  and  her  dowry  might  be 
given  up  to  them  at  once,  or  sent  over  as  early  as  possible  in  anticipation 
of  the  time  appointed  by  the  treaty.  The  first  point  Wolsey  was  willing 
to  concede,  if  assured  of  sufficient  co-operation  from  Flanders  ;  but  the 
conditions  he  required  were  declared  by  the  Flemings  to  be  quite  im- 
possible in  the  exhausted  condition  of  the  country.  The  second  demand 
looked  strange  enough,  and  Wolsey  asked  what  adequate  hostages  they 
could  give  for  a  young  Princess  who  was  the  treasure  of  the  kingdom. 
Would  they  meanwhile  put  some  of  their  fortified  towns  into  the  King's 
hands  ?  This,  too,  the  ambassadors  said,  could  not  be  thought  of  ;  and 
the  embassy  had  made  little  progress  when,  on  March  9,  the  news  from 
Pa  via  reached  London.  The  King  professed  delight  at  the  Emperor's 
victory  ;  bonfires  were  lighted,  wine  flowed  freely  for  everyone  in  the 
streets,  and  on  Sunday  the  12th  a  solemn  mass  was  celebrated  by 
Wolsey  at  St  Paul's. 

The  Cardinal  then,  at  the  request  of  the  Flemings,  dismissed  Brinon 
and  Passano,  and  strongly  urged  that  now  was  the  time  for  both 
allies  to  put  forth  all  their  strength.  They  might  completely  conquer 
France  between  them,  and  Henry,  meeting  the  Emperor  in  Paris, 
would  accompany  him  to  Rome  for  his  coronation.  The  scheme,  of 
course,  was  preposterous  ;  but  the  proposal  of  it  to  the  Emperor  by  the 
English  ambassadors  in  Spain  wrung  from  him  the  confession  that  he 
had  no  money  to  carry  on  the  war,  with  other  admissions  besides,  which 
proved  clearly  that  he  was  really  seeking  to  break  off  his  engagement  to 
the  Princess  Mary,  and  was  bent  on  a  more  advantageous  match  with 
Isabella  of  Portugal.  Thus  England  was  to  obtain  nothing  in  return  for 
all  her  loans  to  the  Emperor  ;  but  the  Emperor,  as  it  soon  appeared, 


1525]      The  Amicable  Grant. —  Treaties  with  France      425 

meant  to  make  his  own  terms  with  his  prisoner,  and  keep  to  himself 
entirely  the  profits  of  a  joint  war ;  in  which,  indeed,  English  aid  had 
profited  him  little. 

Meanwhile  the  victory  at  Pa  via  was  declared  in  England  to  be  a 
great  opportunity  for  tlie  King  to  recover  his  rights  in  France  by 
conducting  a  new  invasion ;  in  aid  of  which  commissions  were  issued 
to  levy  further  contributions,  called  an  "  Amicable  Grant,"  though 
some  instalments  of  the  parliamentary  subsidy  had  still  to  be  received. 
As  commissioner  for  the  City  of  London,  Wolsey  called  the  Lord  Mayor 
and  Aldermen  before  him,  telling  them  that  he  and  the  Archbisliop  of 
Canterbury  had  each  given  a  third  part  of  their  revenues,  and  urging 
that  persons  of  over  X50  income  might  well  contribute  a  sixth  of 
their  goods  according  to  their  own  valuation  made  in  1522.  At  this 
there  was  very  natural  discontent,  the  more  so  as  many  had  incurred 
serious  losses  since  that  date  ;  but  the  matter  was  pressed  both  in  London 
and  in  the  country.  The  demand  was  generally  resisted.  At  Reading 
the  people  would  only  give  a  twelfth.  In  Suffolk  tlie  Duke  of  Suffolk 
persuaded  them  to  give  a  sixth ;  but  the  clothiers  said  it  would  compel 
them  to  discharge  their  men,  and  a  serious  rising  took  place.  At  last, 
instead  of  a  forced  demand,  Wolsey  persuaded  the  King  to  be  content 
with  a  voluntary  "  benevolence."  But  a  new  objection  was  raised  that 
benevolences  were  illegal  by  an  Act  of  Richard  III ;  and  ultimately 
the  King  had  to  give  up  the  demand  altogether,  and  to  pardon  the 
insurgents. 

Wolsey  told  the  citizens  that  the  demand  was  abandoned  because  the 
French  King's  capture  had  disposed  him  to  make  suit  to  England  for  an 
honourable  peace ;  for  if  the  King  had  not  crossed  the  sea  (he  alleged) 
the  money  would  have  been  returned,  and  now  it  would  probably  not  be 
required.  But  until  peace  was  actually  concluded,  they  must  still  hold 
themselves  prepared  to  make  further  sacrifices.  Thus  did  Wolsey  smooth 
the  way  for  a  policy  of  peace  with  France,  which  he  was  now  actively 
pursuing.  Passano,  who  had  not  ceased  to  hold  indirect  communi- 
cation with  him,  again  appeared  in  London  in  June,  no  longer  as  a 
secret  agent,  but  as  an  accredited  ambassador  from  Louise  of  Savoy,  now 
ennobled  with  the  title  of  the  Seigneur  de  Vaulx.  He  concluded  with 
Wolsey  a  forty  days'  truce  ;  but  the  Flemings  immediately  concluded  one 
for  five  months  with  France,  and  the  truce  concluded  by  de  Vaulx  was 
prolonged  to  December  1  by  Brinon,  who  soon  followed  him  again  to 
England  with  a  commission  to  both  for  a  more  lasting  treaty.  The 
terms  required  by  Wolsey  were  hard  ;  but  demands  made  at  first  for  a 
cession  of  Ardres  or  Boulogne  were  given  up,  and  the  old  payments 
exacted  from  France  were  increased  to  a  capital  sum  of  2,000,000  crowns 
payable  at  the  rate  of  100,000  crowns  a  year.  After  long  discussions 
with  Wolsey,  a  set  of  five  treaties  was  signed  at  his  palace  of  the  Moor 
in  Hertfordshire  on  August  30,  the  most  important  being  a  league  for 


426  Treaty  of  Madrid  [i525-6 

mutual  defence,  in  which  Henry  bound  himself  to  use  his  influence 
with  the  Emperor  to  induce  him  to  set  Francis  at  liberty  on  reasonable 
conditions.  At  the  request  of  the  Frenchmen  peace  was  proclaimed  a 
week  later  (September  6). 

The  Pope,  tlie  Venetians,  and  other  Italian  Powers  who  dreaded  the 
overwhelming  ascendancy  of  the  Emperor,  were  glad  of  this  arrangement 
between  France  and  England.  But  it  had  little  effect  on  the  Emperor's 
conduct  towards  his  prisoner,  who  by  this  time  had  been  conveyed  to 
Madrid.  His  sister  Margaret,  Duchess  of  AleuQon,  came  to  Spain  to 
treat  for  his  liberation  ;  but  the  conditions  demanded  by  the  Emperor 
were  such  as  she  had  no  power  to  grant.  The  chief  difficulty  concerned 
the  cession  of  Burgundy.  But  Francis  fell  dangerously  ill,  and  on  his 
recovery  he  agreed  to  concede  even  this  for  the  sake  of  liberty.  On 
January  14,  1526,  he  signed  the  Treaty  of  Madrid,  with  all  its  onerous 
terms,  including,  among  other  things,  the  promise  to  refund  the  sum  of 
500,000  crowns  due  from  the  Emperor  to  Henry. 

England  had  been  unable  to  do  anything  to  mitigate  the  severity 
of  the  conditions.  Henry,  indeed,  had  sent  a  new  ambassador,  Dr 
Edward  Lee,  to  Spain  with  that  object ;  but  it  was  easy  to  prevent 
either  him  or  his  colleagues  from  effectually  interfering  with  the 
negotiations.  After  the  treaty  was  signed,  however,  Francis  told  them 
that  he  was  grateful  to  Henry  above  all  princes  living  for  not  having 
invaded  France,  and  that  Henry  should  know  his  secret  mind  upon  some 
things  as  soon  as  he  had  returned  to  his  realm.  What  he  meant  by  this 
we  may  imagine  from  the  sequel. 

The  preponderance  in  Europe  which  seemed  to  be  secured  to  Charles 
by  the  Treaty  of  Madrid  alarmed  not  only  the  King  of  England.  It 
was  generally  believed,  however,  that  Francis,  on  regaining  his  liberty, 
neither  would  nor  could  allow  himself  to  be  bound  b}^  provisions  to 
which  he  had  no  right  to  assent  without  consulting  the  Estates  of  his 
realm  and  the  duchy  of  Burgundy.  The  Italian  Powers  accordingly 
looked  anxiously  to  Francis,  and,  on  account  of  Francis,  not  less 
anxiously  to  Henry. 

England  was  strong,  and  even  stronger  than  she  had  been.  The  only 
active  pretender  to  Henry's  throne,  Richard  de  la  Pole,  self-styled  Duke 
of  Suffolk,  "  White  Rose  "  as  his  followers  called  him,  had  been  slain  at 
the  battle  of  Pavia  fighting  for  Francis.  Moreover  the  Duke  of  Albany 
had  left  Scotland  for  the  last  time  (he  accompanied  Francis  to  Italy 
and,  but  for.  the  event  of  Pavia,  would  have  gone  on  to  Naples)  ;  so 
that  the  French  party  in  Scotland  was  overpowered,  and  though  there 
were  changes  enough  in  that  country  none  of  them  were  injurious  to 
English  interests.  Henry  was  powerful,  and  no  prince  was  held  in 
higher  esteem.  Special  gifts  had  been  conferred  upon  him  by  three 
successive  Popes,  —  a  golden  rose  by  Julius  II,  a  sword  and  cap  by 
Leo  X  (besides   the   title   of   Defender   of   the   Faith),  and  another 


1526-7]  Embassy  of  the  Bishop  of  Tarhes  427 

golden  rose  by  Clement  VII.  He  was  also  still  highly  popular  at  home  ; 
for  his  subjects  did  not  impute  their  heavy  taxation  to  him.  One  thing 
indeed  he  did  at  this  time,  which  was  disagreeable  to  his  own  Queen. 
He  had  a  bastard  son  six  years  old,  whom  in  June,  1525,  he  created  Duke 
of  Richmond,  assigning  him  at  the  same  time  a  special  household  and 
lauds  as  if  for  a  legitimate  Prince.  But  this,  apparently,  did  not  greatly 
abate  his  popularity ;  and  it  seems  to  have  been  partly  to  conciliate 
public  opinion  that  Wolsey,  in  that  year,  handed  over  to  the  King  the 
magnificent  palace  he  had  built  at  Hampton  Court  as  too  grand  to 
belong  to  a  subject. 

It  was  on  March  17,  1526,  that  Francis  was  released  and  reached 
Bayonne.  That  same  day  he  took  the  English  Ambassador  Tayler  in 
his  arms,  expressing  warm  gratitude  to  Henry,  and  soon  after  he 
dispatched  de  Vaulx  once  more  to  England  with  his  ratifications  of  the 
Treaties  of  the  Moor.  On  May  22,  after  Francis  had  reached  Cognac, 
ambassadors  of  the  Pope,  the  Venetians,  and  the  Duke  of  Milan  made 
an  alliance  with  the  French  King  against  the  Emperor. 

Henry,  who  had  confirmed  his  own  treaty  with  Francis  at  Greenwich 
on  April  29,  was  not  a  party  to  this  League  of  Cognac  ;  but  he  was 
strongly  solicited  to  join  it  by  the  Italian  Powers.  Indeed,  a  special 
place  was  reserved  for  him  in  the  treaty  itself  as  Protector  and  Conservator 
of  the  alliance  if  he  chose  to  join  it,  with  a  principality  in  Naples  as 
an  additional  attraction.  But  he  and  Wolsey  only  dallied  with  the 
confederates,  insisting  on  various  modifications  of  the  treaty,  while 
the  others  were  already  committed  to  hostilities  in  Italy.  Meanwhile 
the  confederacy  moved  on  to  its  ruin,  which  was  completed  at  the 
Sack  of  Rome. 

Francis  naturally  desired  to  obtain  from  the  Emperor  the  best  terms 
he  could  for  redeeming  his  sons.  Wolsey,  however,  had  from  the  first 
endeavoured  to  keep  him  from  any  kind  of  agreement,  assuring  him  that 
he  was  in  no  wise  bound  by  the  Treaty  of  Madrid,  and  hinting  that  a 
match  with  the  Princess  Mary  would  be  more  suitable  for  him  than  one 
with  the  Emperor's  sister  Eleanor,  whom  by  that  treaty  he  had  engaged 
to  marry.  And  though  the  bait  did  not  take  immediately  —  for  Francis, 
as  his  own  ministers  said,  was  ready  to  marry  the  Emperor's  mule  to  re- 
cover his  sons  —  the  Emperor  still  insisted  on  such  intolerable  conditions 
that  Francis  at  last  desired  an  offensive  alliance  with  England  by  which 
he  might  either  dictate  terms  or  redeem  his  sons  by  war.  An  embassy  with 
this  view  headed  by  de  Grammont,  Bishop  of  Tarbes,  came  to  England 
in  February,  1527.  The  ambassadors  were  long  in  negotiation  with 
Wolsey,  who  insisted  first  on  a  new  treaty  of  perpetual  peace,  with  a 
heavy  tribute  from  France,  and  after  all  his  demands  were  conceded 
coolly  told  them  that,  if  the  Emperor  would  not  release  the  Princes 
without  Francis  marrying  Eleanor,  the  King  recommended  him  to  do  so. 
Three  treaties  were  at  last  signed  on  April  30,  and,  after  the  Bishop  of 


428  Wolsey  in  France  [1527 

Tarbes  had  gone  back  to  France  and  returned  again,  another  was  con- 
cluded on  May  29,  for  maintaining  a  joint  army  in  Italy.  But  there 
were  still  matters  to  be  settled,  for  which  Henry  desired  a  personal 
interview  with  Francis.  This  the  French  did  not  favour,  but  said  that 
Wolsey  would  be  welcome  in  France  as  his  master's  representative  ;  and 
Francis  himself  wrote  that  he  would  go  to  Ficardy  to  meet  him. 

The  King  is  said  to  have  alleged  later,  —  though  there  is  no  sufficient 
proof  of  the  truth  of  the  story,  —  that,  during  this  embassy  the  Bishop  of 
Tarbes  had  expressed  a  doubt  concerning  the  Princess  Mary's  legitimacy, 
as  her  mother  Catharine  had  been  the  wife  of  Prince  Arthur,  her  father's 
brother.  It  was  the  King  himself  who  was  now  contemplating  a  divorce 
on  tliis  plea,  although  no  one  yet  knew  it.  As  a  first  step,  in  May  he 
allowed  himself  to  be  cited  in  private  before  Wolsey  as  Legate  and 
called  upon  to  justify  his  marriage.  Nothing  came  of  this  proceeding, 
except  that  on  June  22  Henry  shocked  his  wife  by  telling  her  that  they 
must  part  company,  as  he  found  by  the  opinion  of  divines  and  lawyers 
that  they  had  been  living  in  sin.  He  desired  her,  however,  to  keep 
the  matter  secret  for  the  present  ;  and  Wolsey,  on  his  way  to  France, 
persuaded  both  Archbishop  Warham  and  Bishop  Fisher  that  the  King 
was  only  trying  to  answer  objections  raised  by  the  Bishop  of  Tarbes. 

Wolsey  himself,  however,  did  not  know  all  the  King's  mind  upon  the 
subject  when,  after  landing  at  Calais  in  July,  he  proceeded  tlirough 
France  with  a  more  magnificent  train  than  ever,  not  as  ambassador  but 
as  his  King's  lieutenant,  to  a  meeting  with  Francis  at  Amiens.  On  tliis 
matter  he  believed  he  was  commissioned,  not  only  to  hint  that  Catharine 
would  be  divorced,  but  also  to  put  forward  a  project  for  marrying  the 
King  to  Renee,  daughter  of  Louis  XII.  This  would,  of  course,  have  knit 
firmer  the  bond  between  Henry  and  Francis  against  the  Emperor,  who 
was  Catharine's  nephew.  But  in  France  he  was  instructed  to  keep 
back  "  the  King's  secret  matter,"  or  only  to  intimate  it  very  vaguely ; 
and  during  the  whole  of  his  stay  there,  which  extended  to  two  months 
and  a  half,  he  did  not  venture  to  say  anything  definite  upon  the 
subject. 

Another  matter,  however,  helped  to  strengthen  the  case  for  a  union 
against  the  Emperor.  A  month  before  Wolsey  crossed  the  Channel,  news 
had  reached  England  that  Rome  had  been  sacked,  and  the  Pope  shut  up 
in  the  Castle  of  St  Angelo.  At  Canterbury  Wolsey  ordered  a  litany  to 
be  sung  for  the  imprisoned  Pope,  but  considered  how  he  could  Ibest 
utilise  the  incident  for  the  King's  advantage.  At  Amiens  on  August  18, 
three  new  treaties  were  made,  which  Henry  and  Francis  ratified  forth- 
with ;  and  among  other  things  it  was  settled  that  Mary  should  be  married 
to  the  Duke  of  Orleans  instead  of  to  Francis,  and  that  no  brief  or  Bull 
sliould  be  received  during  the  Pope's  imprisonment,  but  that  whatever 
should  be  determined  by  the  clergy  of  England  and  France  in  the  mean- 
time should  be  valid.    It  Avas  also  agreed  what  terms  should  be  demanded 


1527-8]     Anne  Boleyn. —  War  against  the  Emperor        429 

of  the  Emperor  by  the  two  Kings  ;  and  meanwhile  an  English  detachment 
under  Sir  Robert  Jerningham  was  sent  to  join  the  French  commander 
Lautrec  in  an  Italian  expedition  for  the  Pope's  delivery. 

Before  Wolsey  returned  from  France  he  had  made  the  discovery  that 
the  King's  real  object  in  seeking  a  divorce  had  not  been  imparted  to 
him,  and  that  Henry  was  pursuing  it  independently.  It  was  not  a 
French  princess  whom  Henry  designed  to  place  in  Catharine's  room,  but 
one  Anne  Boleyn,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Boleyn,  a  simple  knight,  who 
had  only  been  created  a  viscount  (by  the  title  of  Rochford)  in  1525. 
The  elder  sister  of  this  lady  had  already  been  seduced  by  the  King,  but 
she  herself  had  resisted  till  she  was  assured  of  the  Crown,  and  Henry 
persuaded  himself  that  all  that  was  required  for  his  marriage  with  Anne 
Boleyn  was  a  dispensation  for  a  case  of  near  affinity  created  by  illicit 
intercourse  with  her  sister.  For  he  did  not,  in  this  first  phase  of  the 
question,  maintain,  as  he  afterwards  did,  that  cases  like  that  of  Catharine 
could  not  be  dispensed  for  at  all.  He  maintained  that  the  dispensation 
procured  for  his  marriage  with  Catharine  was  technically  insufficient,  and 
that  the  marriage  was  consequently  ipso  facto  invalid. 

He  accordingly,  while  Wolsey  was  still  in  France,  dispatched 
Dr  Knight,  his  secretary,  to  Italy  on  pretences  that  did  not  satisfy 
the  Cardinal  ;  and  Knight  performed  his  mission  with  great  dexterity 
according  to  his  instructions.  He  arrived  at  Rome  while  the  Pope 
was  still  in  confinement,  and  though  it  was  hopeless  to  procure  an 
interview,  found  means  to  convey  to  him  the  draft  dispensation  desired 
by  the  King,  and  obtained  a  promise  that  it  should  be  passed  when  he 
was  at  liberty.  Not  long  after  the  Pope  escaped  to  Orvieto,  where 
Knight  obtained  from  him,  in  effect,  a  document  such  as  he  was  instructed 
to  ask  for.  But  unfortunately  it  was  absolutely  useless  for  the  King's 
purpose  until  he  should  be  declared  free  of  his  first  marriage  ;  and 
Knight's  mission  had  no  effect  except  to  open  the  eyes  of  the  Pope  and 
Cardinals  to  Henry's  real  object. 

Meanwhile,  France  and  England  having  become  the  closest  possible 
allies,  the  two  sovereigns  elected  each  other  into  their  respective  Orders 
of  St  Michael  and  the  Garter  ;  and  their  heralds  Guienne  and  Clarencieux 
jointly  declared  war  upon  the  Emperor  at  Burgos  on  January  22,  1528. 
On  this  the  English  merchants  in  Spain  were  arrested,  and  it  was  rumoured 
that  the  heralds  were  arrested  also  :  in  return  for  which  Wolsey  actually 
imprisoned  for  a  time  the  Imperial  Ambassador  Mendoza.  This  war 
was  extremely  unpopular  in  England.  A  French  alliance,  indeed,  was 
generally  hateful,  especially  against  the  Emperor,  who  was  regarded  as  a 
natural  ally.  The  mart  for  English  wools  was  removed  from  Antwerp 
to  Calais  ;  trade  was  interrupted  both  with  the  Low  Countries  and  Spain  ; 
and  this,  added  to  the  effect  of  bad  harvests  at  home,  produced  severe 
distress.  Cloth  lay  on  the  merchants'  hands  unsaleable,  and  the  clothiers 
of  the  Eastern  Counties  were  obliged  to  discharge  their  spinners,  carders. 


430     The  Divorce.    Campeggio' s  mission  to  England    [i528 

and  "  tuckers. "  The  state  of  matters  became,  in  fact,  intolerable,  and  a 
commercial  truce  was  arranged  with  Planders  from  the  beginning  of  May 
to  the  end  of  February  following. 

The  expedition  of  Lautrec  and  Jerningham  in  Italy,  very  successful 
in  the  spring,  proved  completely  disastrous  in  the  following  summer. 
Plague  carried  off  the  two  commanders,  and  the  defection  of  Andrea 
Doria  completed  the  ruin  of  the  allied  forces. 

After  Knight's  failure  Wolsey  addressed  himself  to  the  real  difficulty 
in  attaining  the  King's  object,  and  dispatched  his  secretary  Stephen 
Gardiner  with  Edward  Foxe  to  persuade  the  Pope  to  send  a  Legate  com- 
missioned jointly  with  Wolsey  to  try  in  England  the  question  whether 
the  dispensation  to  marry  Catharine  was  sufficient.  The  commission 
desired  was  a  decretal  one,  setting  forth  the  law  by  which  judgment 
should  proceed,  and  leaving  the  judges  to  ascertain  the  facts  and 
pass  judgment  without  appeal.  This  was  resisted  as  unusual,  and  the 
ambassadors  were  obliged  to  be  satisfied  with  a  general  commission, 
which  Foxe  took  home  to  England,  believing  it  to  be  equally  efficacious. 
His  report  seems  to  have  convinced  the  King  and  Anne  Boleyn  tliat  their 
object  was  as  good  as  gained.  But  Wolsey  saw  that  the  commission  was 
insufficient,  and  he  instructed  Gardiner  to  press  again  by  every  possible 
means  for  a  decretal  commission,  even  though  it  should  be  secret  and  not 
to  be  emploj'ed  in  the  process  ;  otherwise  his  power  over  Henry  was  gone 
and  utter  ruin  hung  over  him  as  having  deceived  the  King  about  the 
Pope's  willingness  to  oblige  him.  Urged  in  this  way,  the  Pope  with  very 
great  reluctance  gave  for  Wolsey's  sake  precisely  what  was  asked  for  — 
a  secret  decretal  commission,  not  to  be  used  in  the  process,  but  only  to 
be  shown  to  the  King  and  Wolsey,  and  then  to  be  destroyed.  He  also 
gave  a  secret  promise  in  writing  not  to  revoke  the  commission  which  was 
not  to  be  used.  This  secret  commission  was  entrusted  to  Campeggio, 
the  legate  sent  to  England  as  Wolsey's  colleague  to  try  the  cause,  with 
strict  injunctions  not  to  let  it  go  out  of  his  hands. 

Campeggio  suffered  severely  from  gout,  and  his  progress  to  England 
was  slow  and  tedious.  He  reached  London  on  October  7,  prostrated  by 
illness  ;  but  he  had  the  full  command  of  the  business,  and  Wolsey  found, 
to  his  dismay,  that  he  had  no  means  of  taking  it  out  of  his  hands. 
Moreover,  Campeggio  had  promised  the  Pope  before  leaving  not  to  give 
sentence  without  reference  to  him.  He  tried  first  to  dissuade  the  King 
from  the  trial  ;  then  to  induce  the  Queen  to  accept  an  honourable  release 
by  entering  a  convent.  Both  attempts  he  found  hopeless.  The  Queen 
was  as  determined  as  the  King,  and  was  supported  by  general  sympathy 
out  of  doors,  the  women,  particularly,  cheering  her  wherever  she  went. 

On  November  8  the  King  declared  to  the  Lord  Mayor  and  Aldermen 
at  Bridewell  the  reasons  for  his  conduct,  imputing,  as  before,  to  the 
French  ambassadors  the  first  doubts  of  his  marriage.  But  before 
matters  had  come  to  a  trial  Catharine  showed  Campeggio  a  document 


1528-9]  The  trial  before  the  Legates  431 

which  seemed  to  make  the  validity  of  the  marriage  unimpeachable.  It 
was  a  copy  of  a  brief  preserved  in  Spain,  by  which  Julius  II  had  given, 
at  the  earnest  request  of  Queen  Isabella,  a  full  dispensation  for  the 
marriage,  assuming  that  the  previous  marriage  with  Arthur  had  really 
been  consummated.  The  King  and  Wolsey  were  seriously  perplexed. 
They  put  forth  reasons  for  believing  the  brief  to  be  a  forgery,  and  urged 
the  Queen  herself,  as  if  in  her  own  interest,  to  write  to  the  Emperor  to 
send  it  to  England,  The  object,  however,  was  too  plain  ;  and  though, 
under  positive  compulsion,  she  did  write  as  requested,  her  messenger,  as 
soon  as  he  reached  Spain,  took  care  to  inform  the  Emperor  that  she  had 
written  against  her  will. 

The  King  was  now  living  under  one  roof  with  Anne  Boleyn,  having 
given  her  a  fine  suite  of  apartments  next  to  his  own  at  Greenwich,  and 
was  quite  infatuated  in  his  passion,  only  awaiting  an  authoritative  pro- 
nouncement that  should  allow  him  to  marry.  Early  in  February,  1529, 
his  prospects  seemed  to  be  changed  by  a  false  report  of  the  death  of 
Clement  VII ;  but  the  Pope,  after  being  really  very  ill,  recovered  slowly  in 
the  spring,  and  was  no  sooner  again  fit  for  business  than  he  was  pestered 
by  English  agents  with  demands  to  declare  the  brief  in  Spain  a  forgery. 
The  attempt  to  discredit  the  brief,  however,  was  at  last  abandoned  ;  and 
the  King  and  Wolsey  determined  to  commence  the  trial  and  push  it  on 
as  fast  as  possible,  for  fear  of  some  arrest  of  the  proceedings.  Good 
reasons  had  already  been  given  at  Rome  by  the  Imperial  ambassador 
for  revocation  of  the  cause ;  but  the  Pope  declined  to  interfere  with 
the  hearing  before  the  Legates. 

The  Court  was  formally  opened  accordingly  at  Blackfriars  on  May  31, 
when  citations  were  issued  to  the  King  and  Queen  to  appear  on  June  18. 
Onthatda3^the  Queenappeared  in  person  before  the  Legates, and  objected 
to  their  jurisdiction.  This  objection  being  considered,  on  the  21st  the 
Legates  pronounced  themselves  to  be  competent  judges  ;  whereupon  the 
Queen  intimated  an  appeal  to  the  Pope  and  withdrew,  after  some 
touching  words  addressed  to  the  King  in  Court.  Being  called  again  and 
refusing  to  return,  she  was  pronounced  contumacious,  and  the  trial  went 
on.  But  an  incident  at  the  fifth  sitting,  which  was  on  the  28th,  aston- 
ished everyone.  John  Fisher,  Bishop  of  Rochester  —  a  lover  of  books, 
who  commonly  avoided  public  life  —  said  that  the  King  at  a  former 
sitting  had  professed  justice  to  be  his  only  aim,  and  had  invited 
everyone  who  could  throw  light  upon  the  subject  to  relieve  his  scruples. 
He  therefore  felt  bound  in  duty  to  show  the  conclusion  which  he  had 
reached  after  two  years'  careful  study  ;  which  was  that  the  marriage  was 
indissoluble  by  any  authority,  divine  or  human,  and  he  presented  a  book 
which  he  had  composed  on  the  subject.  He  was  followed  by  Standish, 
Bishop  of  St  Asaph,  and  Dr  Ligham,  Dean  of  the  Arches,  who  maintained 
the  same  view. 

The  Legates  remonstrated,  rather  mildly,  that  Fisher  was  pronouncing 


432  Fall  of  Wolsey  [1529 

in  a  cause  which  was  not  committed  to  him  ;  and  the  King  composed,  but 
probably  did  not  deliver,  a  very  angry  speech  in  reply  addressed  to  the 
judges.  The  Court  went  on,  taking  evidence  chiefly  about  the  circum- 
stances of  Prince  Arthur's  marriage,  till  July  23,  when  Campeggio 
prorogued  it  to  October  1.  Shortly  afterwards  arrived  an  intimation 
that  the  cause  was  "  advoked "  to  Rome  and  all  further  proceedings 
must  be  prosecuted  there.  This  the  Imperialists  had  procured  on  the 
Queen's  demand  for  justice,  which  the  Pope  could  not  resist,  and  Henry 
saw  that  it  was  a  death-blow  to  his  expectations. 

The  fall  of  Wolsey  was  now  inevitable.  From  the  first  the  business 
of  the  divorce  had  been  a  source  of  intense  anxiety  to  him,  knowing  as 
he  did  that,  if  he  failed  to  give  the  King  satisfaction,  his  ruin  would  be 
easily  achieved  by  the  leading  lords  who  had  been  so  long  excluded  from 
the  King's  counsels.  And  now  that  the  failure  was  complete  he  was 
visibly  out  of  favour.  But  the  King  was  too  well  aware  of  his  value  not 
to  desire  his  advice  about  many  things,  even  now ;  and  there  was  one 
matter  in  particular  in  which  his  guiding  hand  had  scarcely  completed 
his  work.  The  King,  indeed,  had  intended  to  send  him  to  Cambray  to 
assist  in  a  European  settlement  if  the  trial  could  have  been  got  over 
soon  enough ;  but  Bishop  Tunstall  and  Sir  Thomas  More  were  sent  in 
his  place.  By  the  Treaty  of  Cambray,  signed  on  August  5,  the  state  of 
war  between  Francis  and  the  Emperor  was  ended,  the  conditions  of  the 
Treaty  of  Madrid  were  at  length  modified,  and  Francis  was  permitted  to 
redeem  his  sons  without  parting  with  Burgundy.  It  was  undoubtedly 
the  Emperor's  fear  of  England  that  secured  these  favourable  conditions 
for  France,  and  France  had  in  return  to  take  upon  herself  all  the 
Emperor's  liabilities  to  Henry.  The  English  also  made  their  own 
separate  treaties  at  Cambray  both  with  the  Emperor  and  with  Francis. 

But  through  the  influence  of  Anne  Boleyn  Wolsey  was  presently 
excluded  from  the  King's  presence,  and  ultimately  he  found  himself  cut 
off  from  all  communication  with  his  sovereign.  On  October  9,  the  first 
day  of  Michaelmas  term,  he  took  his  seat  as  Chancellor  for  the  last  time 
in  Westminster  Hall.  That  day  an  indictment  was  preferred  against 
him  in  the  King's  Bench,  and  the  30th  of  the  same  month  was 
appointed  for  his  trial.  But  meanwhile  he  was  made  to  surrender 
the  Great  Seal  and  to  execute  a  curious  deed,  in  which  he  confessed  the 
praemunire  of  which  he  was  afterwards  found  guilty,  and  desired  the  King 
to  take  all  his  land  and  property  in  part  compensation  for  his  offences. 
This  he  did,  not  because  the  praemunire  was  just,  but  only  in  the  hope 
of  avoiding  a  parliamentary  impeachment ;  which  nevertheless  was 
brought  forward  in  the  House  of  Lords,  but  was  thrown  out  in  the 
Commons  by  the  exertions  of  his  dependent,  Thomas  Cromwell. 

For  a  new  Parliament  had  been  called,  after  an  interval  of  six  years, 
and  the  session  had  been  opened  by  Sir  Thomas  More,  who  had  just 
been  appointed  Lord  Chancellor  in  Wolsey's  place.     The  elections  had 


1529-30]  Cranmer^s  suggestion  433 

been  unduly  influenced,  and  the  Commons  were  so  subservient  that  one 
of  their  Acts  was  expressly  to  release  the  King  from  repayment  of  the 
forced  loan  —  for  which,  as  may  be  imagined,  they  incurred  general  ill- 
will.  They  also  sent  up  a  host  of  bills  to  the  Lords,  attacking  abuses 
connected  with  probates,  mortuaries,  and  other  matters  of  spiritual 
jurisdiction,  and  also  against  clerical  pluralities,  and  non-residence. 
Bishop  Fisher  thought  it  right  to  protest  in  the  House  of  Lords  against 
the  spirit  and  tendency  of  such  legislation  ;  and  because  he  had  pointed 
to  the  example  of  Bohemia  as  a  kingdom  ruined  by  lack  of  faith,  the 
Speaker  and  thirty  of  the  Commons  were  deputied  to  complain  to 
the  King  that  Fisher  seemed  to  regard  them  as  no  better  than  Turks 
and  infidels.  It  may  be  suspectec^that  they  were  prompted  ;  for  Henrj- 
was  certainly  glad  of  the  opportunity  of  calling  on  the  Bishop  to 
explain  himself. 

On  the  breaking  up  of  the  Legatine  Court  the  King  had  been  just 
about  to  give  up  further  pursuit  of  a  divorce  as  hopeless  ;  and  in  that 
belief  he  had  sought  to  get  the  cause  superseded  at  Rome  that  he  might 
not  be  summoned  out  of  his  own  realm.  But  in  August,  when  he  visited 
Waltham  Abbey  in  a  progress,  he  was  told  of  a  suggestion  made  by 
one  Thomas  Cranmer,  a  private  tutor  who  had  been  there  just  before 
(having  been  driven  from  Cambridge  by  an  epidemic),  that  he  might 
still  get  warrant  enough  for  treating  his  marriage  as  invalid  by 
procuring  a  number  of  opinions  to  that  effect  from  English  and  foreign 
universities.  He  at  once  caught  at  the  idea,  and  relied  on  the  friendship 
of  Francis  to  procure  what  he  wanted  on  the  other  side  of  the  Channel. 

In  the  beginning  of  the  year  1530,  when  the  Emperor  had  gone  to 
Bologna  to  be  crowned  by  the  Pope,  Anne  Boleyn's  father,  who  had 
recently  been  created  Earl  of  Wiltshire,  and  Dr  Stokesley,  Bishop  elect 
of  London,  were  sent  thither  with  a  commission  to  treat  for  a  universal 
peace  and  a  general  alliance  against  the  Turk.  That  was  the  pretext  ; 
and  no  doubt  aid  against  the  Turks  would  then  have  been  particularly 
valuable  to  the  Emperor,  seeing  that  they  had  got  fast  hold  of  Hungary, 
and  had  quite  recently  besieged  Vienna.  But  the  main  object  was  to 
explain  to  Charles  with  great  show  of  cordiality,  now  that  the  two 
sovereigns  were  friends  again,  the  manifold  arguments  against  the 
validity  of  Henry's  marriage  with  his  aunt.  And  with  this  purpose  in 
view,  Stokesley  on  his  way  through  France  strove  to  quicken  the  process 
of  getting  opinions  from  French  universities.  The  decisions  even  of  the 
English  universities  were  only  obtained  in  March  and  April,  under  wliat 
pressure  it  is  needless  to  say.  The  mere  purpose  of  the  proceedings 
raised  the  indignation  of  the  women  at  Oxford,  who  pelted  with  stones 
Bishop  Longland,  the  Chancellor,  and  his  companion,  when  they  came 
to  obtain  the  seal  of  the  University.  No  wonder,  therefore,  that  when 
Wiltshire  arrived  at  Bologna  in  March  no  French  university  had  been 
induced  to  pronounce  a  judgment.     His  mission,  in  truth,  was  anything 


4:34  Wolsey's  Colleges. — His  arrest  [io30 

but  a  success,  and  it  is  hard  to  see  that  much  could  have  been 
expected  of  it.  For  the  Pope,  just  before  his  coming,  had  issued  a  Bull, 
dated  March  7,  committing  the  King's  cause  to  Capisucchi,  Auditor  of 
the  Rota  ;  which  after  his  arrival  was  followed  by  another  on  the  21st, 
forbidding  all  ecclesiastical  judges  or  lawyers  from  speaking  or  writing 
against  the  validity  of  the  marriage.  Worse  still,  Wiltshire's  presence 
gave  opportunity  to  serve  him,  as  Henry's  representative,  with  a  summons 
for  his  master  to  appear  in  person  or  by  deputy  before  the  tribunal  at 
Rome.  The  Pope,  however,  offered  to  suspend  the  cause  till  September, 
if  Henry  would  take  no  further  step  till  then  ;  and  the  King  accepted 
the  offer. 

Wolsey,  meanwhile,  had  been  living  at  Esher,  in  a  house  belonging 
to  him  as  Bishop  of  Winchester,  whither  on  his  disgrace  he  was  ordered 
to  withdraw.  But  his  enemies,  fearing  lest  the  King  should  again 
employ  his  services,  were  anxious  that  he  should  be  sent  to  his  other 
and  more  remote  northern  diocese  ;  and  an  arrangement  was  made  in 
February,  1530,  by  which  he  received  a  general  pardon,  resigning  to  the 
King  for  a  sum  of  ready  money  the  bishopric  of  Winchester  and  the 
Abbey  of  St  Alban's,  while  the  possessions  of  his  archbishopric  of  York 
were  restored  to  him.  He  began  his  journey  north  early  in  Lent, 
paused  at  Peterborough  over  Easter,  and  spent  the  summer  at  Southwell, 
a  seat  of  the  Archbishops  of  York,  where  he  was  intensely  mortified  to 
learn  that  the  King  had  determined  to  dissolve  two  Colleges,  the  one  at 
Ipswich  and  the  other  at  Oxford,  of  which  he  had  brought  about  the 
establishment  with  great  labour  and  cost.  For  this  object,  as  early  as 
1524,  he  had  procured  Bulls  to  dissolve  certain  small  monasteries  and 
apply  their  revenues  to  his  new  foundations  ;  and  the  obloquy  he  had 
incurred  from  other  causes  was  certainly  increased  by  the  dissolution  of 
those  Houses.  Indeed  in  1525  a  riot  took  place  at  Bayham  in  Sussex, 
where  a  company  in  disguise  restored,  though  only  for  a  few  days,  the 
extruded  Canons.  The  Ipswich  College  was  suppressed  by  the  King. 
At  Oxford,  however,  the  buildings  had  advanced  too  far  to  be  stopped 
and  the  work  was  completed  on  a  less  magnificent  design.  After 
Wolsey's  death  the  King  called  it  "King  Henry  VIIPs  College."  It 
is  now  known  as  Christ  Church. 

In  the  autumn  Wolsey  moved  further  north,  and,  reaching  Cawood 
by  the  beginning  of  November,  at  length  hoped  to  be  installed  in  his 
own  Cathedral  of  York  on  the  7th.  But  on  the  4th  he  was  visited  by 
the  Earl  of  Northumberland,  who  suddenly  notified  to  him  his  arrest  on 
a  charge  of  treason.  His  Italian  physician  Agostini  had  been  bribed 
by  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  to  betray  secret  communications  which  he  had 
held  with  the  French  Ambassador  de  Vaulx,  and  the  charge  was  added 
that  he  had  urged  the  Pope  to  excommunicate  the  King  and  so  cause  an 
insurrection.  Unconscious  of  this,  he  was  conducted  to  Sheffield,  where, 
at  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury's  house,  he  was  alarmed  to  learn  that  Sir 


1530]  Death  of  Wolsey.  —  Address  to  the  Pope  435 

William  Kingston  had  been  dispatched  to  bring  him  up  to  London. 
As  Sir  William  was  Constable  of  the  Tower,  Wolse}^  now  perceived  that 
his  execution  was  intended  ;  and  sheer  terror  brought  on  an  illness,  of 
which  he  died  on  the  way  at  Leicester. 

So  passed  away  the  great  Cardinal,  the  animating  spirit  of  whose 
whole  career  is  expressed  in  the  sad  words  he  uttered  at  the  last,  that  if 
he  had  served  God  as  diligently  as  he  had  served  the  King,  He  would  not 
have  given  him  over  in  his  grey  hairs.  Conspicuous  beyond  all  other 
victims  of  royal  ingratitude,  he  had  strained  every  nerve  to  make  his 
sovereign  great,  wealthy,  and  powerful.  His  devotion  to  the  King  had 
undoubtedly  interfered  with  his  spiritual  duties  as  a  Churchman ;  it 
was  not  until  his  fall  that  he  was  able  to  give  any  care  to  his  episcopal 
function.  The  new  career,  so  soon  terminated,  showed  another  and  a 
more  amiable  side  in  his  character.  That  he  might  have  been  happy  if 
unmolested,  even  when  stripped  of  power,  there  is  little  reason  to  doubt. 
Yet  his  was  a  soul  that  loved  grandeur  and  display,  magnificent  in 
building  and  in  schemes  for  education ;  he  was  ambitious,  no  doubt, 
and  it  might  be  high-handed,  as  the  agent  of  a  despotic  master,  but 
with  nothing  mean  or  sordid  in  his  character.  And  something  of  ambi- 
tion might  surely  be  condoned  in  one  whose  favour  the  greatest  princes 
of  Europe  were  eager  to  secure.  For  with  a  penetrating  glance  he  saw 
through  all  their  different  aims  and  devices.  The  glamour  of  external 
greatness  never  imposed  upon  him ;  and,  whatever  bribes  or  tributes 
might  be  offered  to  himself,  his  splendid  political  abilities  were  devoted 
with  single-minded  aim  to  the  service  of  his  King  and  country.  He 
raised  England  from  the  rank  of  a  second-rate  Power  among  the  nations. 
His  faults,  indeed,  are  not  to  be  denied.  Impure  as  a  priest  and  unscru- 
pulous in  many  ways  as  a  statesman,  he  was  only  a  conspicuous  example 
in  these  things  of  a  prevailing  moral  corruption.  But  his  great  public 
services,  fruitful  in  their  consequences  even  under  the  perverse  influences 
which  succeeded  him,  would  have  produced  yet  nobler  results  for  his 
country,  if  his  policy  had  been  left  without  interference. 

Meanwhile,  the  King  had  fallen  on  a  new  device  to  force  the  Pope's 
hand.  A  meeting  of  notable  persons  was  called  on  June  12,  to  draw  up 
a  joint  address  to  his  Holiness,  urging  him  to  decide  the  cause  in 
Henry's  favour,  lest  they  should  be  driven  to  take  the  matter  into  their 
own  hands.  To  obtain  subscriptions  to  this  the  nobles  were  separately 
dealt  with,  and  the  document  was  sent  down  into  the  country  to  obtain 
the  signatures  and  seals  of  peers  and  prelates,  among  others  of  Wolsey 
at  Southwell.  It  was  finally  dispatched  on  July  13;  and  Clement, 
though  he  might  well  have  felt  indignant  at  this  attempt  to  influence 
his  judicial  decision  by  threats,  made  on  September  27  a  remarkably 
temperate  reply.  He  had,  moreover,  a  few  months  before,  sent  to  England 
a  Nuncio  named  Nicholas  del  Burgo  to  smooth  matters  ;  and  the  prospect 
of  justice  to  Catharine  was  not  improved  by  this  perpetual  dallying. 


436  Royal  Supremacy  [i530-l 

Bishop  Fisher,  however,  was  most  assiduous  iu  writing  books  to  support 
her  cause  —  so  much  so  that  Archbishop  Warham,  awed  by  the  King's 
authority,  called  him  to  his  house  one  day,  and  earnestly,  but  in  vain, 
besought  him  to  retract. 

Nevertheless  inhibitions  came  from  Rome  which,  it  was  believed,  made 
the  King  at  one  time  really  think  of  putting  away  Anne  Boleyn.  This 
was  at  the  beginning  of  the  year  1531.  But  he  recovered  heart  when 
repeated  briefs  seemed  only  to  grow  weaker ;  and,  conscious  of  his  power 
at  home,  he  sought  to  attain  his  object  by  breaking  down  the  independ- 
ence of  the  clergy,  from  the  whole  body  of  whom  he  contrived  to  extort, 
not  only  a  heavy  line  for  a  praemunire  which  they  were  held  to  have 
incurred  by  submitting  to  the  legatine  jurisdiction  of  Wolsey,  but  also 
an  acknowledgment  of  his  being  "  Supreme  Head  "  of  the  Church  of 
England.  This  title  was  only  conceded  to  him  by  the  Convocation  of 
Canterbury  after  a  three  days'  debate,  when  it  was  carried  at  last  by  an 
artifice,  and  with  the  modifying  words  "so  far  as  the  law  of  Christ 
allows."  Nor  was  it  without  protest  that  the  northern  clergy  were 
brought  to  the  same  acknowledgment.  This  encroachment  on  their 
liberties  made  the  clergy  of  the  south  regret  their  pecuniary  grant; 
but  they  were  altogether  helpless,  though  in  the  end  of  August  their 
assessment  led  to  a  riotous  attack  on  the  Bishop  of  London's  palace 
at  St  Paul's. 

Parliament  had  met  on  January  15,  and  was  kept  sitting  into  March 
without  doing  anything  material.  All  the  members  were  anxious  to  go 
home,  and  the  Queen's  friends  easily  got  leave.  On  March  30  it  was 
prorogued  for  Easter,  when  Sir  Thomas  More  as  Chancellor,  though 
utterly  sick  of  an  office  which  he  had  unwillingly  accepted  even  with  the 
assurance  that  his  own  convictions  would  be  respected,  found  himself 
obliged  to  declare  to  the  Commons,  in  order  that  they  might  check 
ill  reports  in  the  country,  the  conscientious  motives  by  which  the  King 
said  he  had  been  induced  to  seek  a  divorce,  and  the  opinions  obtained  in 
his  favour  from  the  greatest  universities  in  Christendom.  What  effect 
this  had  in  allaying  popular  indignation  at  the  King's  proceedings  is 
very  doubtful.  A  strange  occurrence  in  February  in  Bishop  Fisher's 
household  had  produced  a  most  unpleasant  impression.  A  number  of 
the  servants  fell  ill,  and  two  of  them  died.  It  was  found  that  the  cook 
had  put  poison  in  some  pottage,  of  which  happily  the  Bishop  himself  had 
not  tasted ;  but  it  was  generally  believed  his  life  had  been  aimed  at  by 
Anne  Boleyn's  friends.  The  King,  however,  was  very  angry  ;  and,  to 
avert  suspicion,  caused  the  Parliament  to  pass  an  ex  post  facto  law,  which 
was  at  once  put  in  force,  visiting  the  crime  of  poisoning  with  the  hideous 
penalty  of  being  boiled  alive. 

At  Rome  the  cause  hardly  made  any  progress.  Henry  in  fact,  though 
he  would  not  appear  there,  either  personally  or  by  proxy,  employed 
agents  to  delay  it,  especially  a  lawyer  named  Sir  Edward  Carne,  called 


1531-2]  Henry  finally  leaves  Catharine  437 

his  excusatory  who,  without  showing  any  commission  from  liim,  argued 
that  he  slioukl  not  be  summoned  out  of  his  reahn.  In  his  protest  to  that 
effect  Henrj'  had  the  support  of  Francis  I,  who  urged  that  the  cause  might 
at  least  be  tried  at  Cambray,  and  procured  a  decision  for  the  King  from 
the  University  of  Orleans  that  he  could  not  be  compelled  to  appear  at 
Rome.  And  thougli  the  process  actually  began  in  June,  it  was  soon 
suspended  for  the  Roman  holidays  from  July  to  October,  when  the 
excusator  at  length  produced  a  commission,  and  the  question  about 
giving  him  a  hearing  next  occupied  the  Court.  In  November  this  was 
refused  until  he  should  produce  a  power  from  the  King  to  stand  to  the 
trial ;  but  he  managed  afterwards  to  get  the  question  further  discussed, 
and,  in  point  of  fact,  the  whole  of  the  following  year  was  wasted  before 
the  principal  cause  was  reached. 

Meanwhile,  Catharine  suffered  more  and  more  from  the  delay  of 
justice.  On  May  31  she  had  to  endure  a  conference  with  about  thirty  of 
the  leading  peers,  accompanied  by  Bishops  Stokesley  and  Longland  and 
other  clergymen,  who  were  sent  by  the  King  to  remonstrate  with  her  on 
the  scandal  she  had  caused  by  his  being  cited  to  Rome.  In  Jul}'^  she  was 
ordered  to  remain  at  Windsor  while  the  King  went  about  hunting  with 
Anne  Boleyn  ;  and,  when  the  Queen  sent  a  message  after  him  regretting 
that  he  had  not  bid  her  farewell,  he  sent  lier  word  in  reply  that  he  was 
offended  with  her  on  account  of  the  citation.  After  that  they  never  met 
again.  She  was  ordered  to  withdraw  to  the  Moor  in  Hertfordshire,  and 
afterwards  to  Easthampstead.  But  even  then  she  was  not  free  from 
deputations ;  for  another  came  to  her  at  the  Moor  in  October,  to  urge 
her  once  more  to  allow  her  cause  to  be  decided  in  England.  But  it 
was  in  vain  they  plied  her  with  arguments,  which  she  answered  with 
equal  gentleness  and  firmness.  As  she  came  to  understand  the  King's 
mind,  she  was  more  resolved  than  ever  to  have  her  cause  decided  at 
Rome. 

And  Rome  was  at  last  really  moved  in  her  behalf.  Slow  as  he  was 
to  take  action,  Clement  was  compelled,  on  January  25, 1532,  to  send  the 
King  a  brief  of  reproof  for  his  desertion  of  Catharine  and  cohabitation 
with  Anne  Boleyn.  But  ELenry  induced  the  Parliament,  now  assembled 
for  a  new  session,  to  pass  a  bill,  —  which  he  told  the  Nuncio  was  passed 
against  his  will  by  the  Commons  out  of  their  great  hatred  to  the  Pope  — 
for  abolishing  the  payment  of  First-fruits  to  Rome.  This  Act,  however, 
it  was  left  in  the  King's  power  to  suspend  till  the  Pope  met  his  wishes ; 
and  how  little  the  Commons  acted  spontaneously  in  such  matters  may 
be  seen  by  what  speedily  followed.  On  March  18  the  Speaker  and  a 
deputation  of  that  body  waited  on  the  King  to  complain  of  a  number  of 
grievances  to  which  the  laity  were  subjected  by  "  the  Prelates  and 
Ordinaries,"  and  which  they  desired  the  King  would  remedy.  But  with 
this  petition  they  at  the  same  time  begged  for  a  dissolution  of  Parliament, 
considering  the  excessive  cost  they  had  sustained  by  long  attendance. 


438    llie  Commons  and  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy  [i532 

The  King  replied  that  their  second  request  was  inconsistent  with  their 
first.  They  must  wait  for  the  answer  of  the  Ordinaries  to  their  com- 
plaints, and  meanwhile  he  desired  their  assent  to  a  very  unpopular  bill 
about  wardships,  which  he  had  persuaded  the  Lords  to  pass.  But  he 
could  not  get  the  Commons  to  agree  to  it. 

Parliament  was  prorogued  for  ten  days  at  Easter.  On  Easter  Day 
(March  31),  William  Peto,  Provincial  of  the  Grey  Friars,  preached  before 
the  King  at  Greenwich  a  sermon  in  which  he  pointed  out  how  Kings 
were  encouraged  in  evil  by  false  counsellors.  After  the  sermon,  being 
called  to  a  private  interview,  Peto  further  warned  the  King  that  he  was 
endangering  his  Crown,  as  both  small  and  great  disapproved  of  his 
designs.  The  King  dissembled  his  ill-will  and  licensed  Peto  to  leave  the 
kingdom  on  his  duties ;  after  which  he  caused  Dr  Richard  Curwen,  a 
chaplain  of  his  own,  to  preach  in  the  same  place  a  sermon  of  an  opposite 
tenor.  In  this  Curwin  not  only  contradicted  what  Peto  had  said  in  the 
pulpit,  but  added  that  he  wished  Peto  were  there  to  answer  him  ;  on 
which  the  Warden  of  the  convent,  Henry  Elstowe,  at  once  answered  him 
in  Peto's  place.  Peto  was  then  recalled  by  the  King,  who  asked  him  to 
deprive  the  Warden  ;  but  he  refused,  and  both  he  and  Elstowe  were 
committed  to  prison. 

When  Parliament  met  again  in  April  the  Commons  were  solicited  for 
aid  in  the  fortification  of  the  Scotch  frontier.  They  objected  to  the 
expense  ;  and  two  members  said  boldly  that  the  Borders  were  secure 
enough,  if  the  King  would  only  take  back  his  Queen  and  live  in  peace 
with  the  Emperor  ;  for  without  foreign  aid  the  Scots  could  do  no  harm. 
On  the  30th  the  King  sent  for  the  Speaker  and  others  of  the  Commons, 
and  delivered  to  them  the  answer  of  the  Ordinaries  to  their  complaints, 
which  he  said  he  did  not  think  would  satisfy  them,  but  he  would  leave 
them  to  consider  it,  and  would  himself  be  an  indifferent  judge  between 
them.  In  such  strange  fashion  did  he  declare  his  impartiality.  On 
May  11  he  sent  for  them  again,  and  said  that  he  had  discovered  that  the 
clergy  were  but  half  his  subjects,  since  the  Bishops  at  their  consecration 
took  an  oath  at  variance  with  the  one  they  took  to  him.  After  some 
references  to  and  fro  the  final  result  was  the  famous  "  Submission  of  the 
Clergy"  agreed  to  on  May  15,  and  presented  to  the  King  at  Westminster 
on  the  following  day.  Hereby  they  agreed  to  enact  no  new  ordinances 
without  royal  licence  and  to  submit  to  a  Committee  of  sixteen  persons, 
one  half  laymen  and  one  half  clerics,  the  question  as  to  what  ordinances 
should  be  annulled  as  inconsistent  with  God's  laws  and  those  of  the  realm. 

On  that  same  day  Sir  Thomas  More,  who  had  done  his  best  to  prevent 
these  innovations,  surrendered  his  office  of  Chancellor,  from  which  he  had 
long  sought  in  vain  to  be  released.  To  fill  his  place  in  some  respects, 
Thomas  Audeley,  the  Speaker,  was  at  first  appointed  Keeper  of  the 
Great  Seal,  but  in  the  following  January  received  the  full  title  and  office 
of  Lord  Chancellor. 


1532-3]  Interview  with  Francis  I. — Granmer  Archbishop  439 

Henry's  way  was  now  tolerably  clear,  and  on  June  23,  1532,  he  made 
a  secret  alliance  with  Francis  I  for  mutual  aid  against  the  Emperor  when 
it  should  be  required.  Francis  for  his  part  delighted  in  the  belief  that 
to  gratify  an  insane  passion  Henry  had  put  himself  completely  in  his 
hands.  Henry,  however,  was  really  using  him  to  ward  off  excommunica- 
tion ;  which,  if  pronounced,  Francis  informed  the  Pope  he  would  resent 
as  deeply  as  Henry  himself.  And,  to  give  greater  effect  to  the  threat, 
Henry  persuaded  him  to  an  interview,  the  only  professed  object  of  which 
—  the  concerting  of  measures  against  the  Turk  —  was  not  only  seen  to 
be  a  pretence,  but  was  meant  to  be  seen  through.  It  took  place  in 
October  between  Calais  and  Boulogne,  with  much  less  pomp  than  the 
Field  of  Cloth  of  Gold  twelve  years  before.  But  the  various  meetings 
lasted  over  a  week,  and  made  an  effective  demonstration ;  and  to  coun- 
teract this  the  Emperor  arranged  a  meeting  with  the  Pope,  which  took 
place  at  Bologna  in  December.  Anne  Boleyn,  of  course,  crossed  with 
Henry  to  the  meetings  with  Francis,  who  was  found  ready  to  dance  with 
her.  She  had  been  created  Marchioness  of  Pembroke  on  September  1, 
and  Imperialists  were  relieved  to  find  that  Henry  had  not  yet  married 
her.  Clement  was  compelled  to  warn  the  King  by  another  brief  on 
November  15  to  put  her  away  on  pain  of  excommunication. 

Towards  the  close  of  the  year  the  Earl  of  Northumberland  invaded 
the  Scotch  border,  and  a  state  of  war  continued  between  the  two  countries 
for  some  months,  but  led  to  no  great  results. 

Another  event  favoured  Henry's  aims.  Archbishop  Warham,  who 
had  striven  hard  to  maintain  the  old  privileges  of  the  clergy,  died  in 
August.  Henry  at  once  proposed  to  name  as  his  successor  Thomas 
Cranmer,  who  had  been  so  useful  in  suggesting  the  appeal  to  the  univer- 
sities. He  had  lately  sent  him  as  ambassador  to  the  Emperor  with 
secret  messages  to  the  German  Princes  to  gain  their  alliance  against  their 
sovereign.  This  intrigue  was  ineffectual,  but  he  accompanied  the 
Emperor  to  Vienna,  and  then  to  Mantua,  where  in  November  he  received 
his  recall  with  a  view  to  his  approaching  elevation.  In  February,  1533, 
bulls  for  his  promotion  were  demanded  of  the  Pope,  who  was  then  still 
at  Bologna  in  frequent  conference  with  the  Emperor,  and  were  obtained 
free  of  payment  of  First-fruits  by  the  suggestion  that  the  King,  if 
favourably  dealt  with,  had  it  in  his  x^ower  to  cancel  the  Act  against 
First-fruits  generally. 

But  before  this,  on  January  25,  Henry  had  secretly  married  Anne 
Boleyn,  and,  knowing  her  to  be  with  child,  was  preparing  to  have  her 
openly  proclaimed  as  Queen.  To  guard  against  consequences,  however, 
he  first  obtained  from  Convocation  opinions  against  the  Pope's  dispensing 
power  in  cases  similar  to  that  of  Catharine,  and  then  from  Parliament  an 
Act  making  appeals  to  Rome  high  treason.  On  Easter  Eve,  April  12, 
Anne  went  to  mass  in  great  state  and  was  publicly  named  Queen.  No 
sentence  had  yet  been  given  by  any  Court  to  release  the  King  from  his 


440  Henry  VIII  excommunicated  [i533^ 

marriage  with  Catharine  ;  but  on  Good  Friday  the  new  Archbishop 
wrote  to  him  (of  course  by  desire)  a  very  humble  request  that  he  would 
allow  him  to  determine  that  weighty  cause  which  had  remained  so  long 
undecided.  The  King  willingly  gave  him  a  commission  to  try  it ;  and 
the  Archbishop  cited  him  and  Catharine  to  appear  before  him  at 
Dunstable  —  a  place  carefully  selected  as  being  conveniently  out  of  the 
way.  There,  on  May  23,  sentence  was  given  of  the  nullity  of  the  King's 
first  marriage  ;  and  five  days  later  at  Lambeth  a  very  secret  enquiry  was 
held  before  Thomas  Cromwell  and  others  as  to  the  validity  of  the  King's 
marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn.  Of  course  it  was  pronounced  valid,  though 
the  very  date  of  the  event  was  uncertain,  and  all  the  details  were  kept 
a  profound  secret.  Anne  was  crowned  at  Westminster  on  Whitsunday, 
June  1,  with  all  due  state,  but  with  no  appearance  of  popular  enthusiasm. 
Then  another  deputation  was  sent  to  Catharine,  now  at  Ampthill,  to 
inform  her  that  she  was  no  longer  Queen  and  must  henceforth  bear 
the  name  of  Princess  Dowager  ;  but  she  refused  to  submit  to  such  a 
degradation. 

Sentence  of  excommunication  was  pronounced  against  Henry  at 
Rome  on  July  11  ;  but  even  now  he  was  allowed  until  the  end  of  Sep- 
tember to  set  himself  right,  before  the  sentence  should  be  declared  openly, 
by  taking  back  his  wife  and  putting  away  Anne  Boleyn.  This  troubled 
his  ally  Francis  more  than  himself ;  for  the  Pope  was  coming  to  France  for 
an  interview  at  which  he  hoped  to  make  Henry's  peace.  This  interview, 
indeed,  had  been  planned  with  Henry's  own  approval,  the  policy  then 
being  to  make  the  Pope  feel  that  he  must  look  to  France  and  England 
to  save  him  from  the  necessity  of  holding  a  General  Council  at  the 
Emperor's  bidding.  But  Henry  now  corapletel}'^  changed  his  tone  and 
endeavoured  to  dissuade  Francis  from  meeting  the  Pope  at  all ;  —  which, 
however,  Francis  was  bent  on  doing,  in  order  to  arrange  the  marriage, 
which  afterwards  took  place,  of  his  son  Henry,  Duke  of  Orleans,  with  the 
Pope's  niece,  Catharine  de'  Medici.  He  met  the  Pope  at  Marseilles  in 
October  ;  but,  while  they  were  both  there  still  in  November,  Dr  Edmund 
Bonner,  a  skilful  agent  of  the  King,  who  had  followed  Clement  from 
Rome,  intimated  to  his  Holiness  an  appeal  on  Henry's  behalf  to  the  next 
General  Council  against  the  sentence  of  excommunication.  Next  month 
the  King's  Council  at  home  came  to  a  resolution  that  the  Pope  should 
henceforth  be  designated  merely  "  Bishop  of  Rome  "  ;  and  during  the 
following  year  written  acknowledgments  were  extorted  from  Bishops, 
abbeys,  priories,  and  parochial  clergy  all  over  the  kingdom  that  the 
Roman  pontiff  had  no  more  authority  than  any  foreign  Bishop. 

The  policy  which  the  King  had  now  been  pursuing  for  four  successive 
years  had  been  inspired  by  Thomas  Cromwell,  who,  as  we  have  seen,  had 
been  in  Wolsey's  service.  He  was  a  man  of  humble  origin,  who,  after  a 
roving  youth  spent  in  Italy  and  elsewhere,  had  risen  by  the  use  of  his 
wits,  and  since  his  master's  fall  had  now  been  for  three  years  a  Privy 


1533-4]     The  Nun  of  Canterbury,  More,  and  Fisher        441 

Councillor.  In  1584  he  was  made  the  King's  chief  secretary,  and  a  few 
months  later  Master  of  the  Rolls.  But  even  in  August,  1533,  he  had 
directed  Cranmer  as  Archbishop  to  examine  one  Elizabeth  Barton, 
commonly  called  the  Nun  of  Canterbury,  or  the  Holy  Maid  of  Kent, 
who  had  long  professed  to  have  visions  and  trances.  Afterwards  he 
examined  her  himself,  and  committed  her  and  a  number  of  her  friends 
to  prison.  She  had  uttered  fearful  warnings  to  the  King  in  the  case  of 
his  marrying  Anne  Boleyn ;  and  efforts  were  made  to  prove  that  she  had 
been  encouraged  by  Catharine's  friends.  It  was  even  sought  to  implicate 
Catharine  herself  but  no  case  could  be  made  out  against  her.  The 
charge  was  more  plausible  against  Bishop  Fisher,  who  had  certainly 
communicated  with  her  in  previous  years,  but  only  in  order  to  test  her 
pretentions,  which  found  wide  credit,  even  with  people  of  high  standing. 
His  name,  and  at  first  that  of  Sir  Thomas  More  likewise,  were  included 
in  a  bill  of  attainder  against  the  Nun's  adherents ;  but  Sir  Thomas 
entirely  cleared  himself,  and  the  charge  against  the  Bishop  amounted 
only  to  misprision.  Ultimately  the  Nun  and  six  others  were  attainted 
of  treason  and  afterwards  executed  at  Tyburn,  while  the  Bishop 
and  five  more  were  found  guilty  of  misprision  of  treason,  and  were 
sentenced  to  forfeiture  of  goods. 

On  March  23,  1534,  the  Pope  pronounced  Henry's  marriage  with 
Catharine  valid,  while  Parliament  in  England  was  passing  an  Act  of 
Succession  in  favour  of  Anne  Boleyn's  issue.  Her  daughter,  Elizabeth, 
had  been  born  in  September,  1533.  Orders  were  circulated  throughout 
the  kingdom  to  arrest  preachers  who  maintained  the  Pope's  authority, 
and  to  put  the  country  in  a  state  of  defence  in  case  the  Emperor 
should  attempt  invasion.  The  King's  subjects  generally  were  required 
to  swear  to  the  Act  of  Succession ;  and  those  who  refused  were  sent  to 
the  Tower,  Sir  Thomas  More  and  Bishop  Fisher  among  the  first.  Then, 
to  prevent  inconvenient  preaching,  the  different  Orders  of  Friars  were 
placed  under  two  Provincials  appointed  by  the  King.  But  the  Grey 
Friars  Observants  declined  the  articles  proposed  to  them  by  these 
Visitors  as  contrary  to  their  obedience  to  the  Pope;  whereupon  some  were 
sent  to  the  Tower,  and  soon  afterwards  the  whole  Order  was  suppressed. 

It  was  fortunate  for  Henrj^  that  on  May  11,  this  year,  he  was  able  to 
make  a  peace  with  his  nephew,  James  V,  Avhich  relieved  him  from  the 
danger  of  a  papal  interdict  being  executed  by  means  of  an  invasion  from 
Scotland.  Just  about  the  same  time  William,  Lord  Dacres,  who  for 
nine  years  past  had  ruled  the  West  Marches  as  his  father  had  done 
before  him,  was  committed  to  the  Tower  on  a  charge  of  treason,  arising, 
apparently,  out  of  border  feuds.  He  was  tried  in  July,  and.  strange  to  say, 
acquitted,  for  such  a  result  of  an  indictment  Avas  then  quite  unheard  of. 
And  the  joy  of  the  people  at  the  event  was  all  the  greater  because  it  was 
known  that  Anne  Boleyn  had  been  using  her  influence  against  him  as 
one  who  sympathised  with  Catharine. 


442  Irish  Rebellion. — Act  of  Supremacy  [i534-5 

But  a  more  serious  danger  now  appeared  in  Ireland.  Gerald,  Earl  of 
Kildare,  the  Lord  Deputy,  who  had  used  the  King's  artillery  for  his  own 
castles,  had  been  summoned  to  England  in  1533,  but  delays  ensued,  and 
he  only  arrived  in  London  in  the  spring  of  1534,  suffering  from  a  wound 
that  he  had  received  in  an  encounter,  and  not  likely  to  live  long.  He 
was  not  at  first  imprisoned,  and  efforts  were  made  to  lure  his  son,  Lord 
Thomas  Fitzgerald,  over  to  England.  But  the  young  man  (deceived, 
it  is  said,  by  a  false  report  of  his  father's  execution)  rebelled,  declaring 
that  he  upheld  the  Pope's  cause  and  that  the  King's  adherents  were 
accursed.  He  murdered  Archbishop  Allen  of  Dublin,  the  Chancellor 
of  Ireland  (July  28),  as  he  was  endeavouring  to  sail  for  England,  and 
became  for  a  short  time  virtual  ruler  of  the  country,  which  he  ordered 
all  the  English  to  quit  on  pain  of  death.  Piers  Butler,  Earl  of  Ossory, 
however,  made  a  stand  for  the  King  at  Waterford,  and  Lord  Thomas 
was  compelled  to  raise  the  siege  laid  by  him  to  Dublin,  when  Sir 
William  Skeffington,  appointed  a  second  time  as  Lord  Deputy,  arrived 
from  Wales  in  October ;  after  which  matters  began  to  mend. 

In  England,  to  complete  the  work  of  the  year.  Parliament  met  in 
November,  and  passed,  among  other  legislation.  Acts  for  confirming  the 
King's  title  as  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church,  for  granting  him  the  first- 
fruits  and  tenths  before  paid  to  the  Pope,  and  for  attainting  More  and 
Fisher  of  misprision  and  the  Earl  of  Kildare  of  treason.  But  Parliament 
passed  measures  at  dictation,  and  several  of  the  chief  lords  of  England 
were  in  secret  communication  with  the  imperial  ambassador  Chapuys  to 
urge  the  Emperor  to  invade  England. 

Cromwell  was  now  appointed  the  King's  Vicar-General  in  spiritual 
things,  and  in  the  spring  of  1535  the  Act  of  Supremacy  began  to  be  put  into 
execution.  An  oath  to  the  succession  of  Anne  Boleyn's  issue  had  already 
been  extorted  in  the  previous  year  from  the  monks  of  the  Charter  House, 
winch  some  of  them  seem  not  to  have  taken  until  after  a  significant  visit 
from  one  of  the  London  Sheriffs.  But  now  they  were  required  to  swear 
to  the  supremacy  in  derogation  of  the  Pope's  authority.  Prior  Houghton, 
with  two  other  Priors  of  the  Order  who  had  lately  come  up  to  London, 
approached  Cromwell  at  the  Rolls  in  the  hope  of  obtaining  some 
mitigation  of  the  terms  required  ;  but  unconditional  acknowledgment 
of  the  King's  supremacy  was  insisted  on.  All  three  refused,  and  repeated 
their  refusal  a  few  days  later  in  the  Tower.  They  were  tried  in  April, 
together  with  Dr  Reynolds  of  the  Brigettine  Monastery  of  Sion,  who, 
having  been  also  committed  to  the  Tower,  had  joined  in  their  refusal ; 
and  all  received  sentence  together.  With  them  also  were  condemned, 
for  a  private  conversation  about  the  King's  tyranny  and  licentiousness, 
John  Hale,  vicar  of  Isleworth,  and  a  youag  priest  named  Robert  Feron  ; 
but  the  latter  had  his  pardon  after  sentence,  having  turned  King's 
evidence.  All  the  others  were  hanged  at  Tyburn  on  May  4,  with  even 
more  than  the  usual  barbarities. 


1535] 


Fisher  and  More  executed  443 


Next  came  the  turn  of  Bishop  Fisher  and  Sir  Tliomas  More,  who 
with  three  fellow-prisoners,  Dr  Wilson,  Abell,  and  Fetherstone,  priests 
lately  most  intimate  in  the  Royal  honsehold,  were  warned  that  they 
must  swear  to  the  Statutes  both  of  Succession  and  Supremacy.  All 
declined  to  do  so.  Six  weeks  were  given  them  to  consider  the  matter ; 
and  visits  were  paid  by  Cromwell  and  other  councillors  to  More  and 
Fisher  in  the  Tower  to  shake  their  constancy ;  but  all  in  vain.  Fisher 
denied  that  the  King  was  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England  ; 
More  said  he  would  not  meddle  with  such  questions.  Fisher  was 
condemned  on  June  17,  and  was  beheaded  on  Tower  Hill  on  the  22nd. 
The  King  was  all  the  more  resolved  on  his  death  because  the  Pope  had 
made  him  a  Cardinal  on  May  20.  On  July  1  More  was  brought  up 
for  trial  on  a  complex  indictment,  one  article  of  which  showed  that 
he  did  not,  like  Fisher,  expressly  repudiate  the  King's  ecclesiastical 
supremacy,  but  only  kept  silence  when  questioned  about  it.  He 
made,  as  might  be  expected,  an  admirable  defence,  but  in  vain  ;  and 
after  his  condemnation  he  declared  frankly  as  to  the  statute  that  it 
was  against  his  conscience,  as  he  could  never  find,  in  all  his  studies, 
that  a  temporal  lord  ought  to  be  head  of  the  spiritualty.  He  was 
sentenced  to  undergo  a  traitor's  death  at  Tyburn  ;  but  it  was  commuted 
by  the  King  to  simple  decapitation  on  Tower  Hill,  where  he  suffered  on 
July  6. 

These  executions  filled  the  world  with  horror,  both  at  home  and 
abroad.  The  Emperor  Charles  V  is  said  to  have  declared  that  he  would 
rather  have  lost  the  best  city  in  his  dominions  than  such  a  councillor  as 
Sir  Thomas  More.  In  Italy  More  was  vehemently  lamented,  and  men 
related  with  admiration  the  touching  devotion  of  his  daughter,  Margaret 
Roper,  who  broke  through  the  guards  to  embrace  him  on  his  way  to  the 
Tower.  He  was  indeed  a  man  to  inspire  affection  far  bej^ond  his  own 
family  circle.  Full  of  domestic  feeling,  yet  no  less  full  of  incomparable 
wit  and  humour,  dragged  into  the  service  of  the  Court  against  his  will 
on  account  of  his  high  legal  abilities  and  intellectual  gifts,  he  had 
refused  to  yield  one  inch  to  solicitations  against  the  cause  of  right  and 
conscience.  A  true  saint  without  a  touch  of  austerity,  save  that  which  he 
practised  on  himself  in  secret,  he  lived  in  the  world  as  one  who  understood 
it  perfectly,  with  a  breadth  of  view  and  an  innate  cheerfulness  of  temper 
which  no  external  terrors  could  depress.  Of  a  mind  altogether  healthy, 
he  was  not  beguiled  by  superstition  or  corrupted  by  gifts,  but  held  his 
course  straight  on.  Brought  up  in  the  household  of  Cardinal  Morton, 
he  had  early  devoted  himself  to  learning,  and  became  the  special  friend 
of  Erasmus.  His  learning  was  entirely  without  pedantry,  even  as  his 
humour  was  without  gall.  He  loved  men,  he  loved  animals,  he  loved 
mechanism,  and  every  influence  that  tended  to  humanise  or  advance  society. 
He  had  served  his  King  in  diplomatic  missions  with  an  ability  that  was 
fully  appreciated,  and  as  Lord  Chancellor  with  an  integrity  that  was 


444  First  suppression  of  rtionasteries  [i535-6 

noted  as  altogether  exceptional.  But  his  very  probity  had  made  him  at 
last  an  obstacle  in  the  King's  path,  and  he  was  sacrificed. 

The  three  priests  who  had  refused  to  acknowledge  the  Supremacy 
were  retained  in  confinement.  Two  years  later  Dr  Wilson  received 
a  pardon.  The  other  two  remained  steadfast  during  five  years' 
imprisonment,  and  were  executed  in  15-iO. 

Pope  Paul  III,  who  had  conferred  the  hat  upon  Fisher  (he  had 
succeeded  Clement  VII  in  the  previous  year),  would  have  issued  a  Bull 
to  deprive  Henry  of  his  kingdom  ;  but,  owing  to  the  mutual  jealousies  of 
the  Emperor  and  Francis  I,  there  was  no  sovereign  who  dared  to  execute 
the  sentence.  Henry,  moreover,  had  been  scheming  for  years  with  the 
citizens  of  Liibeck  to  fill  the  throne  of  Denmark  with  one  who  would 
unite  with  him  and  the  Northern  Powers  of  Europe  against  both  Pope 
and  Emperor ;  and,  though  his  plan  was  a  failure,  the  Danes  elected  a 
Lutheran  King  (Christian  III),  ill-pleasing  to  Charles  V.  Further, 
the  English  King  was  seeking  to  conclude  a  league  with  the  German 
Protestants,  and  his  intrigues  gave  the  Emperor  some  anxiety. 

During  the  latter  half  of  1535  the  Bishops  in  England  were  inhibited 
from  visiting  their  dioceses  pending  a  royal  visitation  of  the  whole 
kingdom,  while  Cromwell  sent  out  special  Visitors  for  the  monasteries, 
who  with  remarkable  celerity  traversed  the  greater  part  of  the  country 
in  a  very  few  months  and  sent  private  reports  of  gross  immoralities, 
alleged  to  have  been  discovered  in  a  number  of  the  Houses  they 
visited.  It  is  impossible,  for  many  reasons,  to  attach  much  credit 
to  these  reports,  or  to  think  highly  of  the  character  of  the  Visitors. 
The  object  was  seen  when  Parliament  met  again  in  February,  1536,  and 
passed,  as  the  principal  measure  of  the  session,  an  Act  for  the  dissolution 
of  such  monasteries  as  had  not  revenues  of  £200  a  year.  It  was  passed, 
as  tradition  in  the  next  generation  reported,  under  very  strong  pressure, 
and  certainly,  as  the  preamble  shows,  on  the  King's  own  statement 
of  the  results  of  the  visitation.  These,  it  was  said,  proved  that  the 
smaller  monasteries  were  given  to  vicious  living,  while  the  larger  were 
better  regulated  ;  though  in  truth  the  Visitors  had  reported  abominations 
quite  as  flagrant  in  the  latter  as  in  the  former. 

Meanwhile,  in  January,  Catharine  of  Aragon  had  died  at  Kimbolton. 
On  hearing  of  the  event  Henry  could  not  help  exclaiming,  "  God  be 
praised  !  We  are  now  free  from  fear  of  war."  If  Catharine  had  lived, 
the  Bull  of  privation  might  even  yet  have  been  launched  when  the 
Emperor  arrived  at  Rome  in  the  spring  ;  but  the  King  calculated  truly. 
The  Court  and  Anne  Boleyn  wore  mourning  for  Catharine.  But  Anne's 
own  fate  was  near  at  hand  ;  for  Henry  had  long  since  grown  tired  of  her, 
and  could  not  make  men  respect  her.  He  now  said  that  he  had  been 
induced  to  marry  her  by  witchcraft.  In  the  course  of  the  month  she 
miscarried.  On  May  Day  there  was  a  tournament  at  Greenwich,  during 
which  the  King  suddenly  left  her  and  went  to  Westminster.     Next  day 


1o3g]  Anne  Boleyn  beheaded  445 

she  was  apprehended  and  taken  to  the  Tower.  One  Mark  Smeton, 
Groom  of  the  Chamber,  had  been  arrested  and  examined  beforehand,  and 
afterwards  her  brother  George,  Lord  Rochford,  and  three  other  courtiers 
were  likewise  placed  in  the  Tower.  Anne  was  charged  with  acts  of 
adultery  with  them  all.  She  protested  her  innocence,  though  she 
acknowledged  some  familiarities.  On  the  loth  she  and  her  brother 
were  condemned,  and  the  latter  suffered  two  days  later  with  the  four 
other  supposed  paramours.  On  the  17th  a  secret  enquiry  was  conducted 
by  persons  learned  in  the  canon  law,  after  which  Cranmer  pronounced 
her  marriage  with  the  King  invalid.  On  the  19th  she  was  beheaded  on 
Tower  Green. 

For  some  time  before  her  arrest  the  King  had  been  secretl}^  talking 
of  matrimonj^  with  Jane,  daughter  of  Sir  John  Seymour,  of  Wolihall, 
Wiltshire.  On  the  very  day  of  Anne's  execution  Cranmer  gave  the  King 
a  dispensation  for  this  new  match,  and  on  the  next  day  the  couple  were 
secretly  betrothed.  On  Ascension  Day,  hoAvever  (May  25),  the  King 
wore  white  as  a  widower  in  mourning  ;  and  it  was  not  till  Whitsunday, 
June  4,  that  Jane  was  openly  produced  as  Queen,  having  been  married 
the  week  before. 

Parliament  had  been  dissolved  not  long  before  Anne  Boleyn's  arrest. 
It  was  the  same  Parliament  which  had  been  summoned  at  Wolsey's  fall, 
and  it  had  lasted  for  six  years  and  a  half.  A  new  Parliament  was 
called,  and  met  on  June  8,  to  pass,  among  other  things,  a  new  Act 
of  Succession  in  favour  of  Jane  Seymour's  issue,  disinheriting  that  of 
both  the  two  former  Queens.  The  Princess  Mary,  though  her  chief 
enemy  was  now  dead,  was  not  restored  to  favour  until,  to  make  life 
bearable,  she  had  signed  without  reading  an  abject  submission,  acknow- 
ledging the  King's  laws  by  which  she  herself  was  a  bastard.  Shortly 
afterwards  died  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  the  King's  natural  son,  who  was 
believed  to  have  been  destined  by  Henry  to  succeed  him  on  the  throne 
in  case  of  failure  of  issue  by  Jane  Seymour ;  for  he  had  procured  a  clause 
in  the  Succession  Act  enabling  him  in  that  contingency  to  dispose  of  the 
Crown  by  will.  Another  Act  passed  was  for  the  attainder  of  Lord 
Thomas  Howard,  brother  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  who  had  presumed  to 
contract  marriage  with  the  King's  niece.  Lady  Margaret  Douglas.  He 
died  in  the  Tower  next  year.  At  this  time  also  the  office  of  Lord  Privy 
Seal  was  taken  from  Anne  Boleyn's  father,  the  Earl  of  Wiltshire,  and 
given  to  Cromwell. 

In  Jul}^  there  was  a  meeting  of  Convocation,  over  which  Dr  Petre 
presided  as  deputy  to  Cromwell,  the  King's  Vicar- General.  Since 
Cranmer  had  been  raised  to  the  Primacy  several  other  Bishops  favourable 
to  the  new  principle  of  Royal  Supremacy  had  been  appointed,  including 
Latimer  of  Worcester  ;  and,  as  the  King  was  hoping  to  strengthen  his 
position  by  an  alliance  with  the  German  Protestants,  it  was  important 
to  set  forth  by  authority  a  formulary  of   the  faith  as  acknowledged 


446  Aske^s  rebellion  [i536 

by  the  Church  of  England.  This  was  done  in  Ten  Articles  not  greatly 
at  variance  with  the  beliefs  hitherto  received,  though  dissuading  the 
use  of  the  term  Purgatory,  and  omitting  all  notice  of  four  out  of  the 
Seven  Sacraments.  This  omission  of  course  attracted  some  observation. 
But  as  to  their  positive  contents  Cardinal  Pole  himself  found  little  fault 
Avith  these  Articles,  his  main  objection  being  to  the  authority  by 
which  they  were  set  forth.  They  were  printed  as  "  Articles  devised  by 
the  King's  Highness  to  stablish  Christian  quietness  and  unity  among 
us." 

The  legislation  of  past  years  had  created  much  popular  discontent, 
which  was  now  increased  by  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries.  In  the 
north  rumours  were  spread  that  the  King  would  appropriate  all  the 
Church  plate  ;  and  when  the  Commissioners  for  levying  a  subsidy  came 
to  Caistor,  in  Lincolnshire,  just  after  two  small  neighbouring  monasteries 
had  been  suppressed,  the  people  banded  together  to  resist  them.  The 
Commissioners  made  a  hasty  retreat,  but  some  of  them  were  captured  and 
compelled  by  the  rebels  to  swear  to  be  true  to  the  King  and  to  take  their 
side.  The  insurgents  likewise  sent  up  two  messengers  to  Windsor  to  lay 
their  grievances  before  their  sovereign.  The  answer  returned  by  Henry 
was  rough  in  the  extreme,  and  he  sent  a  force  under  the  Duke  of  Suffolk 
to  quell  the  rising,  preparing  himself  to  follow  with  another,  which  v/as 
to  muster  at  Ampthill.  The  muster,  however,  was  countermanded  on 
news  that  the  rebels  were  ready  to  submit ;  but  Jjincolnshire  was  scarcely 
quiet  when  a  more  formidable  rising  began  in  Yorkshire,  called  the 
Pilgrimage  of  Grace.  A  lawyer  named  Robert  Aske  caused  a  muster  on 
Skipwith  Moor,  at  which  the  men  swore  to  be  faithful  to  the  King  and 
preserve  the  Church  from  spoil ;  for  here,  as  in  Lincolnshire,  men  desired 
to  combine  loyalty  with  religion,  which  they  believed  to  be  in  danger 
from  the  rule  of  Cromwell  and  such  Bishops  as  Cranmer  and  Latimer. 
Aske  and  his  friends  got  possession  of  York.  They  took  an  oath  of 
adhesion  from  the  Mayor  and  commons  at  Doncaster.  They  replaced 
the  expelled  monks  in  their  monasteries.  Pomfret  Castle  was  delivered 
up  to  them  by  Lord  Darcy  as  too  weak  to  hold  out,  though  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York  had  taken  refuge  with  him  there  ;  and  a  herald  named 
Lancaster,  sent  thither  by  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  was  forbidden  by 
Aske  to  read  the  King's  proclamation,  though  he  fell  on  his  knees  and 
begged  leave  to  execute  his  commission. 

The  Duke  of  Norfolk,  sent  by  the  King  to  put  down  the  rising, 
joined  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury  and  others  in  the  Midlands,  and  sent  an 
address  to  the  rebels,  offering  them  the  choice  of  battle  or  submission. 
But  on  reaching  Doncaster  he  found  that  the  movement  had  assumed 
such  dimensions  that  a  conflict  Avould  have  been  disastrous  ;  and  accord- 
ingly he  made  an  agreement  there  with  the  rebels  (October  27)  and 
arranged  for  a  general  truce  in  the  north,  while  Sir  Ralph  Ellerker 
and  Robert  Bowes  were  sent  up  to  the  King  to  ask  for  an  answer  to 


1536-7]  The  northern  risings  sujjpressed  447 

the  demands  of  the  insurgents.  Henry  wrote  a  temporising  reply,  but 
detained  the  messengers  for  some  time  on  the  excuse  of  various  sinister 
rumours.  Conferences  were  arranged  in  December  at  Pomfret  and 
Doncaster,  and  a  general  pardon  was  proclaimed  at  the  latter  place. 
Hereupon  the  King,  putting  a  smooth  face  on  matters,  wrote  to  Aske  to 
come  up  and  confer  with  him  frankly  ;  and,  though  notwithoutmisgivings 
in  spite  of  his  safe  conduct,  Aske  came  and  seems  to  have  been  won  over 
by  royal  affability.  Early  in  January  (1537)  he  returned  to  Yorkshire 
and  did  his  best  to  allay  disquiet,  declaring  that  the  King  was  everyway 
gracious  and  had  approved  the  general  pardon,  —  that  he  was  sending 
Norfolk  once  more  into  the  north,  and  that  grievances  would  be 
discussed  at  a  free  Parliament  at  York,  where  also  the  Queen  would 
be  crowned. 

But  the  pardon  had  been  already  ill  received  at  Kendal,  in  West- 
morland, where  the  people  said  they  had  done  no  wrong  ;  and  grave 
suspicions  were  aroused  in  Yorkshire  that  the  King  was  fortifying  Hull 
and  Scarborough.  One  John  Hallom  was  taken  in  an  attempt  to 
surprise  Hull,  and  Sir  Francis  Bigod  made  an  equally  futile  effort  to 
march  on  Scarborough.  Bigod  fled  and  was  afterwards  captured  near 
Carlisle,  where  he  had  joined  himself  to  a  new  rising  provoked  by  the 
King's  use  of  border  thieves  to  keep  the  country  down.  The  Duke 
of  Norfolk,  when  he  came  back,  went  first  to  Carlisle,  where  he  proceeded 
by  martial  law  against  seventy-four  of  the  insurgents  and  terrified  the 
country  Math  savage  executions.  He  then  went  on  to  Dui-ham  and 
York,  where  he  endeavoured  to  learn  who  were  chiefly  responsible  for 
the  demands  made  and  conceded  at  Doncaster.  He  got  Aske  into  his 
liands  and  sent  him  up  to  the  King  ;  while  the  Earls  of  Sussex  and 
Derby  reduced  Lancashire  to  submission  by  hanging  the  Abbots  of 
Whalley  and  Sawley  and  one  or  two  monks,  and  securing  the  surrender 
of  the  Abbey  of  Furness. 

The  King's  principal  danger  was  past  ;  but  meanwhile  his  anxieties 
abroad  had  increased.  One  thing  was  in  his  favour,  that  during  the  whole 
of  1536  the  Emperor  and  Francis  I  were  at  war,  and  neither  of  them  wislied 
to  interfere  with  him.  But  the  Pope  was  trying  to  make  peace  between 
them  ;  and  having  created  Reginald  Pole  a  Cardinal  in  December, 
he  gave  him  on  February  7  a  commission  as  Legate  to  bring  about 
Henry's  return  to  his  obedience  to  Rome.  Pole  was  a  grandson  of  the 
Duke  of  Clarence,  brother  of  Edward  IV  ;  and  his  mother,  the  Countess 
of  Salisbury,  was  a  sister  of  that  Earl  of  Warwick  who  was  put  to  death 
by  Henry  VII.  At  the  beginning  of  his  reign  Henry  VIII  wished  to 
atone  for  his  father's  wrong,  and  Reginald  Pole,  showing  a  great  love  of 
letters,  was  educated  at  the  King's  expense  at  Oxford  and  Padua.  For 
this  Pole  was  certainly  most  grateful  ;  but  he  did  not  approve  Henry's 
later  policy  and  obtained  leave  to  go  abroad  again.  Pressed  by  the  King  for 
a  statement  of  his  views  as  to  the  Royal  Supremacy,  he  had  written  a 


448PoZe'5  mission. — Further  suppressio7i  ofmonasteries[i537-s 

treatise  intended  for  the  King's  own  eye,  severely  censuring  liis  policy 
and  the  cruelty  with  which  he  had  enforced  it.  The  King  was  exasper- 
ated at  this,  and  still  more  at  Pole's  being  made  a  Cardinal.  But  it 
was  now  his  duty  to  go  to  England,  or  as  near  it  as  he  could,  and 
publish  the  papal  censures  against  Henry  ;  for  which  an  opportunity 
was  offered  by  the  presence  of  James  V  at  Paris,  where,  on  January  1, 
1537,  he  married  the  French  King's  daughter  Madeleine.  There  were 
many  indications,  indeed,  that  the  English  would  welcome  a  Scotch 
invasion  if  Henry  did  not  mend  his  ways.  But  Francis  did  not  dare  to 
receive  at  his  Court  a  papal  Legate  denounced  by  Henry  as  a  traitor, 
whose  surrender  he  claimed  by  treaty  ;  and  Maria  of  Hungary,  the 
Regent  of  the  Netherlands,  also  warned  Pole  not  to  come  near  her, 
but  to  seek  refuge  with  the  Cardinal  of  Liege.  Pole's  mission  was 
consequently  a  complete  failure. 

And  now  Henry,  having  reduced  the  whole  of  the  north  country  to 
subjection,  left  unfulfilled  his  promise  of  a  free  Parliament  at  York.  On 
Norfolk's  return  he  instituted  a  Council  to  govern  the  north  —  at  first 
under  Bisbop  Tunstall  of  Durham,  afterwards  under  Holgate,  Bishop 
of  Llandaff.  Meanwhile  a  Council  of  divines  met  in  London  to 
supply  some  omissions  in  the  King's  book  of  Articles  issued  in  the 
previous  year  ;  and  the  result  was  the  publication  of  a  treatise  entitled 
The  Institution  of  a  Christian  3Ian,  which  the  King  allowed  to  go 
forth  as  a  manual  of  doctrine  agreed  upon  by  the  Bishops,  without 
giving  it  the  express  sanction  of  a  work  which  had  been  examined  by 
himself.  It  was  accordingly  called  "the  Bishops'  Book."  Five  years 
later,  a  considerably  revised  edition  of  it,  which  had  really  been 
examined  by  the  King,  was  issued  under  the  title  of  A  Necessary 
Doctrine  for  any  Christian  3Ian,  and  was  commonly  called  "the  King's 
Book."  In  both  these  treatises  the  old  number  of  seven  Sacraments 
was  acknowledged,  and  the  doctrine  concerning  each  of  them  was  defined. 

On  October  12  the  Queen  gave  birth  to  a  son  (the  future  Edward  VI) 
at  Hampton  Court.  She  died  twelve  days  after.  Three  months  previ- 
ously James  V  also  had  lost  his  newly-wedded  Queen  Madeleine. 

In  the  following  year  (1538)  the  suppression  of  the  monasteries  was 
carried  further.  Several  of  the  Abbots  and  priors  were  induced  to  make 
formal  surrenders,  which  were  often,  no  doubt,  voluntary  in  one  sense, 
since  pensions  were  more  acceptable  than  visitations.  The  King's  agents 
were  likewise  zealous  in  putting  down  images,  pilgrimages,  and  super- 
stitions. A  wonder-working  crucifix  at  Boxley  in  Kent  was  destroyed  ; 
and  a  solemn  enquiry  was  held  into  the  nature  of  a  venerated  relic, 
the  "  Blood  of  Hailes,"  reputed  to  be  the  blood  of  our  Lord. 

Meanwhile  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries  was  quickened  by 
information  for  treason  against  the  heads  of  Houses  who  rejected  the 
Royal  Supremacy.  The  Prior  of  Lenton  in  Nottinghamshire,  and  the 
Abbot  of  Woburn  were  both  executed.     All  friars  were  compelled  to 


1536-9]     Execution  of  Lords  Exeter  and  Montague  449 

put  aside  their  habits,  and  their  Houses  were  confiscated.  These 
proceedings  were  not  relaxed  in  view  of  danger  from  abroad,  when  the 
King  heard  of  the  ten  years'  truce  made  in  June  between  the  Emperor 
and  Francis.  In  September  the  magnificent  shrine  of  St  Thomas  at 
Canterbury  was  robbed  of  all  its  treasures,  and  the  relics  which  had  been 
the  object  of  so  many  pilgrimages  were  burned.  Henry's  wrath  was 
stimulated  against  the  Saint  who  had  brought  a  King  of  England  low. 
The  news  of  this  outrage  excited  peculiar  horror  at  Rome ;  but  all  the 
Pope  could  do  was  to  reissue  (December  17)  the  Bull  of  Excommunica- 
tion already  published  in  1535,  with  additions  setting  forth  the  King's 
new  enormities,  and  to  attempt  to  procure  its  proclamation  at  least  at 
Dieppe  and  Boulogne,  or  in  Scotland  or  Ireland. 

But  Henry  anticipated  the  danger  which  threatened  him.  At  the 
end  of  August  Cardinal  Pole's  brother  Sir  Geoffrey  was  arrested ;  and, 
questions  having  been  put  to  him  concerning  his  communications  over 
sea,  the  fear  of  torture  wrung  from  him  information  which  was  thought 
to  implicate  his  other  brother  Lord  Montague  and  the  Marquis  of 
Exeter.  These  two  noblemeji  were  accordingl}^  lodged  in  the  Tower 
on  November  4.  Exeter  would  be  next  in  succession  if  the  King  died 
without  lawful  issue,  and  Montague  was  the  lineal  heir  of  Clarence. 
The  Marchioness  of  Exeter  and  the  Countess  of  Salisbury,  Montague's 
mother,  were  also  closely  examined.  The  two  noblemen  were  tried  for 
treason  and  beheaded  on  December  9,  others  who  were  found  guilty 
along  with  them  being  hanged  and  quartered  at  Tyburn.  Sir  Geoffrey 
received  a  pardon  on  January  4,  in  consideration  of  his  unwilling 
disclosures.  On  the  other  hand.  Sir  Nicholas  Carew,  who  was  arrested 
on  December  31,  was  found  guilty  of  treason  in  February,  1539, 
mainly  for  conversations  with  the  Marquis  of  Exeter,  and  was 
beheaded  on  Tower  Hill  on  March  3. 

The  Pope,  however,  was  noAv  encouraged  by  the  better  under- 
standing between  the  Emperor  and  Francis  to  send  Cardinal  Pole 
on  a  new  mission  to  those  two  sovereigns  to  induce  them  to  forbid 
commercial  intercourse  with  England  ;  and  David  Beton  was  at  the 
same  time  made  a  Cardinal  with  a  view  to  his  publishing  in  Scotland 
the  Bull  of  Excommunication  against  Henry.  Pole  travelled  by  land 
to  Spain,  and  on  February  15  was  received  by  the  Emperor  at  Toledo 
in  spite  of  the  remonstrances  of  the  English  ambassador,  Sir  Thomas 
Wyatt.  Yet  his  arrival  did  not  seem  agreeable  to  the  Emperor,  who 
declined  to  do  as  the  Pope  desired ;  and  Pole  returned  to  Carpentras, 
where  he  stayed  with  his  friend  Sadoleto  till  he  received  an  answer 
to  a  message  that  he  sent  to  Francis.  But  the  French  King  was  only 
willing  to  prohibit  intercourse  with  England  on  condition  that  the 
Emperor  would  do  the  same  ;  and  Pole's  second  legation  bore  no  more 
practical  fruit  than  the  first  had  done. 

Henry  was  nevertheless  seriously  alarmed.     Orders  were  given  for 

c.   M.   II.  II.  29 


450         Act  of  the  Six  Articles. — Anne  of  Cleves     [i539-40 

the  construction  and  repair  of  fortifications  on  the  coasts,  and  general 
musters  were  held.  The  people,  believing  in  the  national  danger, 
were  zealous  for  the  defence  of  the  country.  Parliament  was  called 
together  in  April,  and  occupied  itself  mainly  in  passing  what  was  called 
the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  for  enforcing  religious  unity.  This  was  an 
answer  to  the  taunts  that  the  English  were  heretics,  and  that  the  Pope's 
excommunication  was  well  deserved.  By  this  severe  enactment  denial 
of  transubstantiation  involved  death  by  fire  and  confiscation  of  goods, 
no  abjuration  being  allowed  in  bar  of  execution;  and  it  was  further 
declared  felony  to  maintain,  either  that  Communion  in  both  kinds  was 
necessary,  or  that  priests  or  any  man  or  woman  who  had  vowed  chastity 
or  widowhood  might  marry,  or  that  private  masses  were  not  laudable, 
or  that  auricular  confession  was  not  expedient.  But  for  all  these 
offences  except  the  denial  of  transubstantiation,  a  first  conviction  was 
visited  merely  with  imprisonment  and  confiscation ;  a  second  was 
punished  capitally.  There  was  also  passed  a  great  Act  of  Attainder 
against  not  only  Exeter  and  Montague,  but  the  Countess  of  Salisbury 
and  a  large  number  of  other  persons,  some  of  whom  were  alive  —  for  the 
most  part  refugees  abroad  —  and  some  had  been  condemned  and  executed 
in  recent  years  for  treason.  But  the  danger  seemed  even  to  increase 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  year,  when  the  Emperor,  on  the  invitation  of 
Francis,  passed  through  France  on  his  way  to  the  Low  Countries,  and 
was  hospitably  entertained  in  Paris. 

In  this  crisis  Henry  sought  security  by  arranging  a  new  marriage  for 
himself  with  Anne,  sister  of  William,  Duke  of  Cleves,  who  by  his  pre- 
tensions to  Gelders  was  a  thorn  in  the  side  of  the  Emperor,  and  had, 
besides,  family  and  other  ties  with  the  Protestant  Princes  of  Germany. 
With  these,  moreover,  Henry  had  for  some  time  been  cultivating  a  good 
understanding  and  had  given  them  great  hopes  in  the  previous  years  of 
a  religious  union  against  both  Pope  and  Emperor.  And  though  the 
Germans  were  sadly  disappointed  by  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  the 
Six  Articles,  against  which  they  strongly  remonstrated,  the  political 
support  of  England  was  too  valuable  to  be  hastily  rejected. 

In  November  proceedings  for  treason  were  taken  against  the  two 
great  Abbots  of  Reading  and  Colchester ;  and  against  the  Abbot  of 
Glastonbury  for  felony ;  all  three  were  executed.  These  trials  were  cer- 
tainly irregular,  and  the  treasons  seem  to  have  consisted  merely  of  pri- 
vate conversations  disapproving  of  Royal  Supremacy  and  of  the  King's 
proceedings.  But  the  unwillingness  of  these  Abbots  to  surrender  was 
perhaps  their  chief  crime,  and  a  rush  of  surrenders  followed,  so  that 
very  soon  not  a  single  monastery  was  left. 

In  the  last  days  of  December  Anne  of  Cleves  crossed  from  Calais  to 
Deal,  from  which  she  went  that  day  to  Dover  and  on  by  stages  through 
Canterbury  to  Rochester,  where  she  remained  all  New  Year's  Day,  1540. 
Here  she  received  a  surprise  visit  from  the  King,  who  came  incognito 


1540]  »  Anne  of  Cleves  divorced.     Cromwell  executed      451 

and  made  himself  known  to  her  ;  as  he  afterwards  stated,  he  was 
disappointed  as  to  her  beauty,  though  he  had  secured  beforehand  her 
portrait  painted  by  Holbein.  He  returned  to  Greenwich  and  received 
his  bride  publicly  in  Greenwich  Park  on  January  3.  The  wedding  took 
place  on  the  6th. 

Just  six  months  later  this  marriage  was  declared  null,  but  for  the 
present  no  one  doubted  its  validity.  Believing  that  it  would  bring 
favour  to  the  new  German  theology,  Dr  Barnes  and  tAvo  other  preachers 
of  what  was  called  the  New  Learning,  were  indiscreetly  bold  at  Paul's 
Cross  ;  but  what  school  of  opinion  would  prevail  was  for  some  time 
uncertain.  Parliament  met  on  April  12,  and  under  the  management 
of  Cromwell,  who  on  the  ITtli  was  created  Earl  of  Essex,  did  its  best 
still  further  to  enrich  the  Crown.  The  great  Military  Order  of  St  John 
of  Jerusalem  was  suppressed  and  its  endowments  were  confiscated  ;  a 
heavy  subsidy  was  also  voted,  payable  by  instalments  in  four  years. 
But,  these  things  being  secured,  a  great  change  took  place.  On  June  10 
Cromwell  was  arrested  at  the  Council  table  and  committed  to  the 
Tower,  where  he  was  questioned  about  the  circumstances  of  the  King's 
marriage,  and  forced  to  make  written  statements  to  serve  as  evidence 
for  its  dissolution.  But  nothing  was  yet  known  on  the  subject  when 
the  two  Houses  of  Parliament,  acting  on  a  hint,  prayed  that  the  validity 
of  his  marriage  might  be  inquired  into  by  Convocation.  This  was  done, 
and  after  various  depositions  had  been  read  to  show  that  the  King  had 
never  given  his  "  iuAvard  consent "  to  his  own  public  act,  a  sentence  of 
nullity  was  pronounced. 

This  removed  at  once  any  fear  of  a  misunderstanding  with  the 
Emperor,  while  it  disappointed  Francis  and  the  Duke  of  Cleves. 
Anne  herself,  however,  consented  to  the  separation  and  was  provided 
for  in  England,  admitting  that  she  remained  a  maid.  A  month  later  it 
was  announced  that  the  King  had  married  Catharine  Howard,  niece  of 
the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  who  was  prayed  for  as  Queen  on  August  15. 
Meanwhile,  July  9,  a  Bill  of  Attainder  was  passed  against  Cromwell  in 
Parliament  on  account  of  various  acts,  some  of  which  were  regarded 
as  treasonable  and  some  heretical,  among  the  latter  being  his  support 
of  Dr  Barnes.  He  was  beheaded  on  Tower  Hill  on  July  28.  Two 
days  later  Dr  Barnes,  and  with  him  Jerome  and  Garrard,  the  two 
other  clergymen  who  had  preached  at  Paul's  Cross  in  the  spring,  were 
burned  as  heretics  at  Smithfield  ;  while  three  of  the  Old  Learning  who 
had  been  attainted  in  Parliament  were  hanged  at  the  same  place  as 
traitors. 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  say  that  Cromwell  entirely  directed  the 
policy  of  England  during  the  3^ears  of  his  ascendancy  ;  for,  as  he  told 
Cardinal  Pole,  he  himself  considered  it  the  very  height  of  statesmanship 
to  endeavour  to  discern  what  was  in  the  King's  own  mind  and  set 
himself  zealously  to  follow  it  out.     And  this,  indeed,  is  the  explanation 


452  The  King^s  visit  to  Yorkshire  [i540-i 

of  his  whole  policj'.  He  laboured  to  satisfy  the  King  ;  yet  at  times 
he  mistook  the  King's  intention,  and  had  the  mortification  occasion- 
ally to  see  the  King  himself  deliberately  upset  all  that  he  had  been 
endeavouring  to  establish,  or  even  to  incur  the  King's  heavy  displeasure. 
He  maintained  his  position  by  pure  obsequiousness,  and  there  was 
no  kind  of  cruelty  or  tyranny  of  which  he  declined  to  be  the  agent. 
Seldom  have  vast  and  multifarious  interests  been  so  completely  under 
the  control  of  a  statesman  so  unscrupulous.  He  was  continually  open 
to  bribes  and  was  guilty  of  many  acts  of  simon}'.  No  doubt  there  was 
something  engaging  in  his  personality  to  men  who  like  himself  could 
take  the  world  as  it  came.  His  early  wanderings  had  given  him  a 
knowledge  of  men  which,  combined  with  a  first-rate  capacity  for 
business,  had  paved  his  way  to  fortune.  They  had  also  given  him 
cultivated  tastes  and  an  acquaintance  with  Italian  literature  which  few 
Englishmen  possessed  in  his  day.  It  was  from  a  study  of  the  great  work 
of  Machiavelli,  at  a  time  when  it  was  still  in  manuscript,  that  he  derived 
those  political  principles  which  guided  him  through  his  whole  career. 

For  more  than  a  year  the  King  was  highly  satisfied  with  his  fifth 
wife.  In  other  matters  he  was  not  yet  at  ease.  He  had  now  no  such 
convenient  tool  as  Cromwell,  and,  distrusting  most  of  his  remaining 
ministers,  stood  in  fear  of  a  new  insurrection.  In  April,  1541,  a 
conspiracy  was  detected  in  Yorkshire  to  kill  Holgate,  Bishop  of  Llan- 
daff,  whom  he  had  appointed  President  of  the  North,  and  take  pos- 
session of  Pomfret  Castle.  Though  called  a  rebellion  by  chroniclers, 
the  design  was  suppressed  before  it  came  to  a  head,  and  the  conspirators 
were  executed,  some  in  London  and  some  at  York.  It  was  clear  that 
the  north  of  England  was  in  a  dangerous  state,  and  Henry  thought  it 
advisable  to  go  thither  in  person  with  a  force  of  4000  or  5000  horse. 
First,  however,  he  determined  to  clear  the  Tower  of  inconvenient 
prisoners.  The  aged  Countess  of  Salisbury,  who  had  been  attainted 
in  Parliament  without  a  trial  two  years  before,  was  beheaded  in  the 
Tower  on  May  28.  Lord  Leonard  Grey  was  tried  on  June  25,  and 
executed  on  the  28th  for  conduct  considered  treasonable  when  he  was 
Lieutenant  of  Ireland. 

The  King  left  London  for  the  north  on  June  30  ;  but  his  progress 
was  impeded  by  storms  and  floods,  so  that  he  only  reached  Lincoln 
on  August  9.  On  entering  Yorkshire  he  was  met  by  the  country 
gentlemen  ;  and  those  of  them  who  had  taken  part  in  the  rebellion 
of  1536-7,  including  Edward  Lee,  Archbishop  of  York,  made  their  sub- 
mission to  him  kneeling,  with  large  gifts  of  money  and  thanks  for  his 
pardon.  The  like  submission  and  gifts  had  been  made  to  him  in 
Lincolnshire.  He  delayed  his  arrival  at  York  till  the  middle  of 
September,  expecting  (as  he  afterwards  gave  out)  a  visit  there  from 
James  V.  But  as  the  Scottish  King  made  no  sign  of  coming,  he  left  on 
the  27th  on  his  return  southward.     By  the  beginning  of  November  he 


1541-2]       Catliarine  Howard  beheaded. — Scotland  453 

was  again  at  Hampton  Court,  when  secret  information  was  revealed 
to  him  through  Cranmer.  The  Queen,  it  was  found,  had  before  her 
marriage  to  him  been  too  intimate  with  more  than  one  person  ;  and  it 
was  alleged  that  even  during  the  royal  progress  in  Lincolnshire  she 
had  secret  meetings  with  a  paramour.  The  supposed  accomplices  of 
her  guilt  were  executed ;  and,  Parliament  having  met  in  January,  1542, 
an  Act  of  Attainder  was  passed  against  the  Queen,  who  on  February  13 
was  beheaded  within  the  Tower.  She  steadfastly  denied  any  miscon- 
duct since  her  marriage  ;  and  her  fate  has  been  thought  to  liave  been 
the  result  of  political  intrigue. 

For  about  a  year  and  a  half  the  King  remained  a  widower.  Mean- 
while it  should  be  noted  that,  having  obtained  from  Parliament  in  1539 
powers  for  the  creation  of  new  bishoprics,  during  the  next  three  years 
he  applied  a  portion  of  the  confiscated  property  of  the  monasteries  to 
the  endoAvment  of  six  new  sees  ;  one  of  which,  Westminster,  was  dissolved 
in  the  following  reign,  but  the  other  five,  after  some  vicissitudes,  are  in 
existence  at  the  present  day.  Here  also  may  be  mentioned  the  publica- 
tion of  an  Authorised  English  Bible,  which  was  first  issued  and  ordered 
to  be  read  in  churches  as  early  as  1536. 

In  March,  1542,  Henry  began  pressing  his  richer  subjects  for  a 
loan;  which,  though  little  hope  was  entertained  of  repayment,  was 
generally  granted,  in  the  expectation  tliat  the  money  would  be  used  in 
a  war  against  France.  But,  though  Francis  and  the  Emperor  were  on 
the  verge  of  war,  and  the  former  really  invaded  the  latter's  dominions  in 
July,  England  remained  neutral  for  nearly  a  whole  year  after.  Henry's 
design  was  first  to  get  Scotland  completely  into  his  power. 

A  brief  account  seems  desirable  at  this  point  of  the  course  of  events 
in  Scotland.  At  the  time  of  Albany's  final  withdrawal  from  the  king- 
dom in  the  early  summer  of  1524,  James  V  was  only  twelve  years  old, 
and  should  have  remained  still  for  some  time  under  tutelage.  But  the 
circumstances  were  peculiar.  Albany  had  not  relinquished  his  claims 
upon  the  government,  but  had  left  behind  him  a  garrison  at  Dunbar, 
and  his  cause  was  still  upheld  by  James  Beton,  Archbishop  of  St  Andrews, 
and  Gawin  Dunbar,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen.  His  part}',  however,  had  really 
collapsed,  and  in  July  Queen  Margaret  caused  her  son  to  be  declared  of 
age  by  a  Council  at  Holyrood,  at  which  most  of  the  Scotch  lords  swore 
fealty.  There  seemed  then  to  be  a  very  general  feeling  for  an  agreement 
with  England,  especially  as  the  lords  were  encouraged  to  believe  that 
their  King  would  be  allowed  to  marry  the  Princess  Mary,  notwithstand- 
ing her  engagement  to  the  Emperor  ;  from  w^iich,  as  Wolsey  secretly 
informed  Margaret,  Henry  intended  to  induce  Charles  to  release  her. 

Unfortunately,  the  plans  of  the  King  and  Wolsey  included  the  recon- 
ciliation of  Margaret  to  her  husband  Angus,  w^ho,  after  being  for  two 
years  a  refugee  in  France,  came  to  England  just  as  Albany  returned,  and 


454  Scotland  during  the  youth  of  James  V      [1524-32 

was  bent  on  going  back  to  his  own  country.  Margaret  would  not  hear 
of  being  reconciled  to  him  —  all  the  less  as  she  had  now  bestowed  her 
affections  on  young  Henry  Stewart,  second  son  of  Lord  Evandale,  whom 
she  had  made  Lord  Treasurer ;  and  both  she  and  Arran,  the  great  rival 
of  Angus,  declared  that  if  the  latter  were  allowed  to  cross  the  border, 
negotiation  with  England  was  at  an  end.  Angus,  however,  made  his 
way  to  Scotland,  and,  together  with  the  Earl  of  Lennox  and  some  other 
gentlemen,  scaled  the  town  walls  of  Edinburgh  at  four  o'clock  on  a 
November  morning  ;  after  which  they  opened  the  gates  to  their  com- 
panies, and,  when  it  was  day,  proclaimed  at  the  Cross  that  they  came  as 
loyal  subjects  objecting  to  evil  councillors  about  the  King.  But,  as  the 
Castle  opened  lire  upon  him,  Angus  found  it  prudent  in  the  evening  to 
quit  the  town  and  retire  to  Dalkeith ;  and  that  same  night  Margaret 
took  her  son  with  her  from  Holyrood  into  the  Castle  for  security.  She 
then  dispatched  in  his  name  an  embassy  to  England ;  which,  being  re- 
ceived at  Greenwich  just  before  Christmas,  proposed  a  peace,  with  the 
marriage  of  James  to  Mary,  and  retui-ned  with  an  encouraging  reply. 
But  Angus  had  been  meanwhile  inaking  friends  with  Archbishop  Beton 
and  others  who  were  displeased  with  the  Queen's  exclusiveness;  and,  when 
the  lords  came  to  Edinburgh  for  a  Parliament  in  February,  1525,  they 
compelled  her  to  bring  her  son  out  of  the  Castle  to  the  Tolbooth,  where 
a  Council  was  appointed  to  carry  on  the  government ;  and  the  summonses 
of  treason  against  Angus  and  his  friends  were  declared  untrue. 

Margaret  next  sent  a  secret  message  to  Albany  asking  for  French 
support ;  but  the  time  was  unlucky,  for  the  date  of  her  messenger's 
instructions  was  just  two  days  before  the  battle  of  Pavia.  Indeed  from 
this  time  the  French  were  generally  very  cautious  about  interfering  in 
Scotch  affairs  without  the  consent  of  Henry,  who  was  always  a  possible 
ally  against  the  Emperor,  or  might  be  a  very  dangerous  enemy.  And 
Henry  not  only  favoured  Angus,  but  remonstrated  strongly  with  his 
sister  on  her  efforts  to  procure  a  divorce  from  him.  Angus  thus  had  full 
control  of  affairs  for  three  years,  during  which  the  young  King  was 
jealously  guarded,  and  all  important  offices  were  filled  by  his  relatives. 
It  was  a  time  when  none  could  prevail  against  a  Douglas.  But  Margaret 
obtained  from  Rome  a  divorce  from  Angus  and  married  Henry  Stewart, 
who  was  afterwards  created  Lord  Methven  ;  and  her  son,  after  repeated 
efforts  had  been  made  for  his  liberation,  escaped  to  Stirling  Castle  in 
June,  1528.  In  a  few  months  Angus  and  his  brother  Sir  George  Douglas 
were  driven  to  take  refuge  in  England,  where,  to  James'  great  grief,  they 
were  well  received  by  Henry. 

James  had  no  desire  to  quarrel  with  his  uncle,  but  the  intrigues  of 
Angus,  together  with  border  raids,  brought  about  the  hostilities  which 
we  have  noticed  in  1532,  when  the  Earl  of  Northumberland  invaded  the 
East  Marches  as  far  as  the  neighbourhood  of  Dunbar.  By  the  mediation 
of  Francis  peace  negotiations  were  opened  next  year  at  Newcastle,  and  in 


1532-42]  Jariies  V  and  Henry  VIII  455 

May,  1534,  peace  was  concluded  in  London.  Henry  then  sent  to  his 
nephew  the  Order  of  the  Garter  and  afterwards  endeavoured,  but 
without  success,  to  draAv  him  into  his  own  policy  in  religion  against  the 
Pope.  Henry  might  well  desire  this  ;  for  his  own  conduct  had  raised 
the  political  importance  of  Scotland  among  the  nations.  The  Emperor 
courted  James'  friendship,  and  the  Pope  sent  him  a  consecrated  sword 
and  hat,  meaning  to  take  away  Henry's  title  of  Defender  of  the  Faith 
and  bestow  it  upon  the  Scottish  King.  Scotland,  moreover,  was  an 
asylum  for  persons  who  disliked  Henry's  measures  against  the  Church  ; 
and  there  was  a  serious  possibility  of  an  invasion  from  Scotland  to  drive 
Henry  from  tlie  throne  if  he  would  not  make  his  peace  with  Rome. 

In  1536  James  went  to  France  under  engagement  to  marry  ]\Iary  of 
Bourbon,  daughter  of  the  Duke  of  Vendome  ;  but  the  lady  did  not  please 
him,  and  he  actually  married  Madeleine,  eldest  daughter  of  Francis  I,  at 
Paris  in  January,  1537.  He  took  her  with  him  to  Scotland  ;  but  she  died 
in  the  following  July.  Next  year  he  married  Mary,  eldest  daughter  of 
the  Duke  of  Guise  and  widow  of  the  Duke  of  Longueville.  Thus  he  was 
still  strongly  bound  to  France  ;  but  France  remained  on  good  terms  with 
England,  and  James  had  no  desire  to  disturb  the  existing  tranquillity. 
In  1541  died  two  infant  Princes  to  whom  Mary  had  given  birth,  and 
also  James'  mother  Margaret,  the  Queen  Dowager.  Another  child  was 
expected  in  1542,  the  year  at  which  we  have  now  arrived,  when  Henry,  as 
we  have  said,  was  scheming  to  get  Scotland  completely  under  his  power. 

In  the  spring  Sir  Thomas  Wharton,  Deputy  Warden  of  the  West 
Marches,  submitted  to  the  King  and  his  Council  a  proposal  to  kidnap 
James  while  he  was  somewhere  near  Dumfries,  and  to  bring  him  to 
Henry.  The  project,  however,  was  disapproved  as  dangerous  and  sure 
to  be  attended  with  scandal  if  it  failed.  In  July  the  outbreak  of  war 
between  Francis  and  the  Emperor  cut  off  Scotland  from  any  hope  of  aid 
from  France  against  English  aggression ;  and,  while  James  was  anxious 
for  a  conference  between  commissioners  of  both  realms  to  put  down 
border  raids.  Sir  Robert  Bowes  was  sent  down  to  the  border  and 
arranged  with  Angus  an  invasion  of  Teviotdale.  It  took  place  on 
August  24,  when  the  English  burned  several  places  ;  but  on  their  return 
they  were  caught  in  an  ambuscade  at  Hadden  Rig,  Sir  Robert  Bowes 
and  most  of  the  leaders  being  taken  prisoners.     Angus,  however,  escaped. 

That  very  day,  in  total  ignorance  of  this  reverse  in  the  north,  the 
Privy  Council  were  making  preparations  for  a  more  considerable  invasion 
under  Norfolk.  The  news  of  Bowes'  defeat  made  Englishmen  all  the 
more  eager  to  avenge  it.  But  James  liad  done  nothing  to  provoke  war. 
His  ambassador  was  still  in  the  English  Court,  desiring  a  passport  for 
a  larger  embassy  to  treat  of  peace  ;  and,  though  he  hardly  met  with  due 
civility,  a  meeting  was  at  length  arranged,  which  took  place  at  York  in 
September  between  commissioners  on  both  sides.  But  musters  were 
made  at  the  same  time  all  over  England  ;  and,  as  Henry  would  accept 


456    Battle  of  the  Solway  Moss.     Death  of  James  V  [i542 

no  terms,  without  free  delivery  of  the  prisoners  taken  by  the  Scots  and 
renunciation  of  their  alliance  with  France,  the  result  was  war.  After  it 
was  begun  Henry  published  a  manifesto  in  his  own  justification,  in  which 
James  was  reproached  with  having  shown  ingratitude  for  the  protection 
afforded  to  him  in  his  early  years,  by  declining  to  meet  Henry  at  York. 
The  English  King  also  revived  the  old  claim  of  superiority  over  Scotland. 

The  Duke  of  Norfolk  crossed  the  border  in  October,  and  burned 
Kelso  and  laid  waste  the  neighbouring  country,  but  was  obliged  to  return 
to  Berwick  in  eight  days  for  lack  of  victuals.  An  army  suddenly  raised 
by  James  was  only  able  to  skirmish  with  the  invaders  and  harass  their 
retreat.  James  would  have  pursued  them  further  to  revenge  the  injury; 
but  the  nobles  objected,  and  he  returned  to  Edinburgh.  He  was  warned 
not  to  risk  his  life,  being  childless,  in  dangerous  expeditions.  But  in 
November  he  passed  secretly  to  the  West  Borders  as  far  as  Lochmaben, 
and  directed  Lord  Maxwell,  the  Warden  there,  with  the  Earls  of  Cassillis 
and  Glencairn  and  other  lords,  to  invade  England  near  the  Solwa}-. 
They  entered  the  Debateable  Land  by  night,  in  numbers  reckoned  at, 
about  17,000,  and  burned  some  places  on  the  Esk  before  daybreak 
on  November  24.  But  Wharton  at  Carlisle,  having  got  notice  of  the 
project,  sallied  out  first  with  a  small  company  to  reconnoitre  ;  and  when 
others,  following,  brought  up  his  numbers  to  about  2000,  he  crossed  the 
Leven  in  view  of  the  enemy.  The  Scots,  believing  that  the  Duke  of 
Norfolk  had  come  upon  them,  began  to  withdraw,  discharging  ordnance 
to  cover  their  retreat,  which  they  could  only  effect  by  fording  the  Esk 
with  a  moss  on  their  left  hand.  But  the  retreat  soon  became  a  rout. 
Many  were  drowned  in  the  Esk  ;  only  twenty  were  slain,  and  about  1200 
prisoners  were  taken,  including  two  Earls  and  five  Barons.  Deeply 
mortified  with  this  disgraceful  defeat,  James  withdrew  to  Edinburgh  and 
then  to  Falkland,  where  he  remained,  ill  and  dejected,  while  news  was 
brought  him  that  his  Queen  at  Linlithgow  had  borne  him  a  daughter  on 
December  8.     He  had  no  comfort  in  the  news,  and  died  on  the  11th. 

The  child  was  Mary  Stewart,  who  thus  became  Queen  when  only 
a  week  old.  On  hearing  of  her  father's  death,  Henry  liberated  the 
Solway  Moss  prisoners  from  the  Tower,  and  called  his  pensioners,  the 
Earl  of  Angus  and  his  brotlier,  to  a  conference  with  them,  proposing 
a  treaty  between  the  two  kingdoms,  with  provisions  for  the  future 
marriage  of  Prince  Edward  with  the  new-born  babe,  who  was  to  be 
brought  up  in  England  till  she  reached  marriageable  age.  Having  given 
pledges  to  promote  this  design,  the  Scotch  lords  were  allowed  to  return 
to  their  country,  for  which  they  set  out  on  New  Year's  Day,  1543, 
honoured  with  great  gifts  upon  their  departure.  Meanwhile  Cardinal 
Beton  had  claimed  thegovernmentof  Scotland  under  an  alleged  will  of  the 
deceased  King ;  but,  this  being  treated  as  a  forgery,  the  claims  of  the  Earl 
of  Arran,  as  next  in  the  succession,  were  admitted  by  the  nobles,  and 
Beton  was  thrown  into  prison.     Hereupon  the  Cardinal  laid  the  kingdom 


1543]       Treaties  toith  Scotland. —  War  with  France       457 

under  interdict.  Nevertheless  Arran  called  a  Parliament,  which  met  at 
Edinburgh  on  March  12,  and  in  the  main  favoured  Henry's  policy;  for 
the  marriage  initself  was  generally  approved,  the  Douglases  were  restored 
to  their  estates,  and,  the  influence  of  Beton  being  excluded,  an  Act  was 
passed  to  permit  the  use  of  English  Bibles.  But  the  English  King's 
demand  for  the  control  of  the  young  Queen  during  her  childhood  was 
absolutely  refused,  as  likewise  was  another  for  the  surrender  of  fortresses 
in  Scotland  ;  and  a  little  later,  Sir  George  Douglas  being  sent  up  with 
the  Earl  of  Glencairn  for  an  adjustment,  Henry  agreed  that  the  royal 
child  should  remain  in  Scotland  till  she  was  ten  years  old,  sufficient 
hostages  meanwhile  remaining  for  her  at  the  English  Court.  To  this, 
in  effect,  the  Scotch  lords  were  brought,  though  with  difficulty,  to  con- 
sent in  the  beginning  of  June  ;  and  by  the  efforts  of  Glencairn  and  Sir 
George  Douglas  two  treaties  were  concluded  at  Greenwich  on  July  1,  for 
peace  and  for  the  marriage. 

This  arrangement  offered  a  fair  show  of  an  international  settlement  ; 
but  there  were  secret  articles,  apart  from  the  treaty,  which  Henry  was 
getting  his  friends  in  Scotland  to  sign,  and  by  which  he  hoped  to  keep 
the  government  of  the  country  entirely  in  his  power.  Meanwhile, 
however,  Cardinal  Beton  had  been  released  from  prison  on  April  10  ; 
Matthew,  Earl  of  Lennox,  who  had  just  come  from  France  (son  of  that 
Earl  who  had  entered  Edinburgh  with  Angus  in  1524),  sought  to  sup- 
plant Arran  both  as  Governor  and  in  the  succession  to  the  Crown  ;  and 
Argyle  and  Bothwell  joined  the  party  to  protect  the  rights  of  the  Queen 
Dowager  and  the  independence  of  the  country. 

Meanwhile  Henry,  having  obtained  another  heavy  subsidy  from 
Parliament,  had  concluded,  on  February  11,  a  secret  treaty  with  the 
Emperor  against  France,  which  was  still  unavowed  when  confirmed,  first 
by  the  Emperor  in  Spain,  March  31,  and  then  by  Henry  at  Hampton 
Court  on  Trinity  Sunday,  May  20.  But  joint  demands  were  formulated 
to  be  made  of  Francis  by  heralds  of  the  Emperor  and  Henry  at  once. 
Francis,  however,  refused  passports  to  the  heralds  to  enter  his  country 
and  the  demands  were  intimated  in  London  to  the  French  ambassador. 
Then  on  July  7  Sir  John  Wallop  was  appointed  commander  of  a 
detachment  which  joined  the  Emperor  at  the  siege  of  Landrecies  ; 
where,  however,  the  joint  efforts  of  the  allies,  though  prolonged  for 
months,  proved  a  total  failure. 

Just  after  Wallop's  departure  the  King,  on  July  12,  married  his 
sixth  and  last  wife,  Catharine  Parr.  England  won  little  glory  from 
the  campaign  abroad,  though,  strengthened  by  Henry's  alliance,  the 
Emperor  was  able  in  September  to  bring  the  Duke  of  Cleves  into 
subjection. 

Open  war  with  France  rendered  Henry's  designs  on  Scotland  more 
difficult.  To  secure  the  aid  of  Arran  he  had  made  him  the  most 
splendid  offers  —  that  he  should  have  the  Princess  Elizabeth  as  a  bride 


458  Mary  Steivart  crowned. —  The  Treaties  repudiated  [1543-4 

for  his  son,  and  that  he  should  himself  be  King  of  Scotland  beyond 
the  Forth.  But  Arran  could  not  easily  withstand  the  growing  feeling 
of  suspicion  against  England  ;  and,  though  he  ratified  the  treaty  with 
Henry  at  Holyrood  on  August  25,  in  presence  of  a  number  of  the 
nobility,  he  had  even  before  that  date  resigned  the  charge  of  the  infant 
Queen  and  her  mother  to  the  Cardinal  and  his  friends.  He  then  sought 
a  meeting  and  reconciliaton  with  the  Cardinal  at  Falkirk,  where  he 
abjured  his  Protestant  heresies.  Immediately  afterwards,  on  Septem- 
ber 9,  they  crowned  the  child  at  Stirling  as  Queen.  Henry's  anger  was 
intense.  But  the  feeling  of  the  Scots  against  England  was  still  more 
aggravated  by  the  discovery  that  some  Scotch  merchant-ships,  whose 
safety  ought  to  have  been  secured  by  the  treaty,  had  been  arrested  at  an 
English  port  on  the  plea  that  they  were  carrying  victuals  to  France. 
Henry,  moreover,  let  the  two  months  expire  within  which  he  should  have 
ratified  the  treaty  ;  so  that  the  Scots  justly  felt  they  had  been  deluded. 
Early  in  October  a  French  fleet  arrived  at  Dumbarton  with  money  to 
oppose  the  designs  of  England.  With  it  also  came  a  French  ambassa- 
dor. La  Brosse,  and  a  papal  Legate,  Cardinal  Grimani.  But  the  Earl  of 
Lennox  at  once  intercepted  the  money,  and,  to  maintain  his  opposition 
to  Arran,  left  the  party  of  France  and  joined  that  of  Henry. 

In  September,  while  professing  peace  with  Scotland,  Henry  had 
meditated  a  further  outrage  by  an  invasion  under  the  Duke  of  Suffolk ; 
but  this  was  wisely  forborne.  The  Scottish  people  were  already  deeply 
incensed  ;  and  the  English  ambassador.  Sir  Ralph  Sadler,  had  to  leave 
Edinburgh  for  his  own  safety,  and  take  refuge  in  Angus'  Castle  of 
Tantallon.  In  December  the  Scotch  Parliament  met,  declared  the 
treaties  with  England  no  longer  binding,  and  renewed  the  old  league 
with  France.  Henry  immediately  sent  a  herald  to  Scotland  with  a 
threatening  and  reproachful  message  to  be  read  to  the  Estates.  It  was 
received  by  the  Governor  after  the  Parliament  had  been  dissolved.  It 
apparently  helped  to  bring  about  a  formal  agreement  which  Angus  and 
Lennox  made  with  him  on  January  13,  1544,  and  in  which  the  Earls  of 
Cassillis  and  Glencairn  likewise  took  part,  all  promising  to  unite  against 
the  old  enemy  England.  But  the  same  lords  presently  asked  England's 
aid  to  support  them  in  their  own  country;  and  a  treaty  was  signed  at 
Carlisle  on  May  17,  by  Glencairn  and  by  the  Bishop  of  Caithness  in 
behalf  of  Lennox,  binding  them  to  procure  Henry's  appointment  as 
Protector  of  Scotland,  to  put  the  chief  fortresses  of  the  country  into  his 
hands,  and,  if  possible,  to  get  possession  of  the  young  Queen's  person, 
and  convey  her  to  England.  Lennox  was  then  to  have  the  regency  of 
Scotland  and  to  marry  Henry's  niece,  Margaret  Douglas.  This  marriage 
actually  took  place  in  the  following  summer  ;  and  Darnley  was  born  of 
it  next  year. 

But  already  at  the  beginning  of  the  same  month  of  May  a  fleet  of 
200  sail  under    John    Dudley,  Viscount    Lisle,  had  appeared  in  the 


1544]  Scotland  and  France  invaded.   Capture  of  Boulogne  459 

Firth  of  Forth  and  landed  an  army  under  the  Earl  of  Hertford.  The 
Earl  first  captured  Leitli,  then  burned  Edinburgh  and  l^eith  also,  and 
re-embarked  in  less  than  a  fortnight,  leaving  a  detachment  to  return  to 
Berwick  by  land,  which  likewise  wasted  and  burned  everything  on  its 
way.  Having  thus  dealt  an  effective  blow  at  Scotland,  which  was 
followed  up  in  the  summer  and  autumn  by  continual  ravages  of  the 
border,  with  destruction  of  towns  and  villages  on  a  scale  quite  unpre- 
cedented, Henry  crossed,  on  July  14,  to  the  siege  of  Boulogne,  which 
was  formed  before  his  arrival.  It  had  been  agreed,  after  some  disputes, 
that  this  time  the  Emperor  and  the  King  should  operate  against  the 
common  enemy  separately  and  join  their  forces  at  Paris.  The  siege  of 
Boulogne,  which  was  very  protracted,  was  not  quite  in  accordance  with 
this  plan.  The  Emperor  advanced  into  the  heart  of  France,  and 
captured  St  Dizier  after  a  six  weeks'  siege ;  but,  in  default  of  active 
support  from  his  ally,  on  September  18  he  made  a  separate  peace  with 
Francis  at  Crejsy,  and  England  was  left  to  carry  on  the  war  alone. 
Boulogne  had  capitulated  on  September  14.  Another  siege  —  that  of 
Montreuil  —  was  abandoned,  in  which  Count  van  Buren  had  been  engaged 
with  the  Duke  of  Norfolk.  The  King  crossed  again  to  Dover  on  the 
80th.  In  October,  after  the  failure  of  a  French  attempt  to  recover 
Boulogne  by  surprise,  conferences  took  place  at  Calais  through  the 
mediation  of  the  Emperor ;  but  peace  could  not  be  established,  as  the 
French  insisted  on  the  restoration  of  Boulogne,  and  the  English  on  a 
promise  to  render  no  further  assistance  to  the  Scots. 

The  league  between  Henry  and  the  Emperor  had  been  hollow  from 
the  first ;  nor  had  it  then  been  easily  adjusted,  the  objects  of  the  allies 
being  entirely  different.  Henry  had  foreseen,  long  before  he  entered  on  it, 
that  his  Scottish  policy  would  involve  a  war  with  France  ;  the  Emperoi- 
desired,  if  he  could  not  drive  the  Turks  out  of  Hungary,  at  least  to 
break  up  the  shameful  alliance  between  them  and  the  French  King. 
The  Pope  meanwhile  was  urging  both  the  Emperor  and  Francis  to 
peace,  so  that  a  General  Council  might  meet  to  put  down  heresy — that 
of  England  most  of  all ;  and  now  that  peace  was  made,  the  Council  was 
appointed  to  meet  at  Trent  in  March,  1545. 

England  being  thus  isolated,  her  resources  were  now  put  to  a  severe 
strain.  Henry  had  already,  at  the  beginning  of  the  year  1544,  been 
absolved  by  Parliament  from  repayment  of  the  forced  loan  he  had  levied 
two  years  before,  and  it  was  not  in  this  year  that  he  began  to  debase  the 
currency.  On  May  16,  however,  he  issued  a  proclamation  "  enhancing  " 
gold  and  silver,  that  is,  raising  the  rate  of  the  coins  to  prevent  their 
being  exported  ;  for  the  quality  of  the  English  coinage,  at  this  date, 
was  still  high,  and  it  was  consequently  in  much  demand  in  other 
countries.  But  before  another  twelvemonth  had  expired,  a  debased 
currency  was  issued,  which  was  afterwards  lowered  still  further.  Mean- 
while, in  June  of  this  year  a  loan  was  obtained  from  the  City  of  London 


460  Ancrum  Moor. —  The  siege  of  Boulogne  abandoned  [1544-5 

by  the  mortgage  of  some  Crown  lands,  and  in  January,  1545,  a  new 
benevolence  was  demanded  for  the  wars  of  France  and  Scotland. 

For  the  subjugation  of  the  latter  country  Henry  had  relied  chiefly 
on  the  aid  of  the  Douglases  and  of  the  Scotch  heretics,  who  hated 
Cardinal  Beton  and  desired  the  overthrow  of  the  monasteries  and  the 
Church.  But  the  Douglases  were  double-dealers,  and,  since  Hertford's 
burning  of  Edinburgh,  when  the  Governor  released  them  from  confine- 
ment to  serve  against  the  common  enemy,  they  had  shown  so  much 
loyalty  to  their  country  that  they  were  absolved  from  attainder  by  the 
Scottish  Parliament  in  December.  The  King  on  this  gave  ear  to  a 
project  of  Sir  Ralph  Evers  and  Brian  Layton  for  subduing  the  domains 
of  the  Douglases,  together  with  the  whole  country  south  of  Forth.  In 
February,  1545,  accordingly,  Evers  and  Layton  raided  the  Scotch 
border  in  the  usual  fashion  as  far  as  Melrose,  where  they  wrecked  the 
Abbey  and  violated  the  tombs  of  the  Douglases.  Angus  and  Arran, 
however,  met  them  at  Ancrum  Moor  near  Jedburgh  and  with  greatly 
inferior  numbers  routed  the  English  host,  taking  prisoners  the  leaders 
and  some  hundreds  of  their  followers. 

The  war  between  France  and  England  still  went  on,  but  was  attended 
with  little  advantage  to  either  side.  Marshal  du  Biez  formed  the  siege 
of  Boulogne  in  January  ;  but  as  England  commanded  the  sea  it  was 
ineffectual ;  and,  though  renewed  efforts  were  made  in  the  summer, 
they  were  equally  fruitless. 

The  French,  indeed,  collected  a  great  fleet  under  Annebaut  and 
entered  the  Solent,  where  a  squadron  drawn  up  at  Portsmouth  was 
unable  for  some  time  to  attack  them  for  lack  of  wind.  In  preparing 
for  action,  moreover,  the  English  lost  a  fine  vessel,  the  Mary  Rose.,  which 
heeled  over  by  accident  and  sank  before  the  King's  eyes,  almost  all  her 
crew  being  drowned.  The  French,  on  the  other  hand,  would  have 
attacked  the  fleet  at  Portsmouth  harbour,  but  could  not  approach  with 
safety ;  and  though  they  overran  part  of  the  Isle  of  Wight  they  were 
soon  driven  out.  They  were  then  carried  eastward  off  the  Sussex  coast, 
which  they  attacked  with  little  effect,  and  after  an  indecisive  action  in 
the  Channel,  ending  at  nightfall,  they  retired  to  their  own  coast.  The 
siege  of  Boulogne  was  then  abandoned,  and  in  September  Lord  Lisle 
landed  in  Normandy  and  burned  Treport ;  but  sickness  had  broken  out 
in  the  fleet  and  it  returned. 

That  same  September  the  Earl  of  Hertford  invaded  the  Scotch 
Marches,  took  Kelso,  Home,  Melrose,  and  Dryburgh,  and  even  outdid 
previous  works  of  destruction.  Between  the  8th  and  the  23rd  of  the 
month  he  demolished  seven  monasteries,  sixteen  castles,  towers,  or  "  piles," 
five  market-towns,  243  villages,  thirteen  mills,  and  three  hospitals. 

In  November  Parliament  met  and,  besides  granting  the  King  a  new 
and  heavy  subsidy,  put  at  his  disposal  the  property  of  all  hospitals,  col- 
leges, and  chantries  to  meet  the  cost  of  the  wars.    Oxford  and  Cambridge 


1545-6]  Peace  tvith  France  461 

took  alarm,  but  received  assurances  that  they  should  be  spared  ; 
there  were  limits,  evidently,  that  even  Henry  would  not  exceed.  There 
was  also  a  heresy  bill  brought  forward  in  the  House  of  Lords,  which 
after  much  discussion  was  read  no  less  than  five  times  and  then  passed 
unanimously ;  but  apparently  it  was  rejected  in  the  Commons,  for  it  did 
not  become  law.  On  Christmas  Eve  the  King  in  person  prorogued 
Parliament  and  is  recorded  to  have  delivered  a  remarkable  speech,  in 
which  he  referred  to  the  prevalent  disputes  about  religion  and  urged 
more  charity  and  forbearance. 

In  the  autumn  there  had  seemed  to  be  a  prospect  of  peace  with 
France.  For  peace  the  French  were  anxious  if  Henry  could  be  induced 
to  give  up  Boulogne.  The  Emperor  offered  his  services  as  mediator  ; 
but  a  conference  at  Brussels  led  to  no  result,  because,  though  the  whole 
English  Council  was  in  favour  of  the  surrender,  Henry  himself  was 
firmly  opposed  to  it.  The  Emperor  was  not  greatly  distressed  by  the 
failure,  but  sought  to  renew  and  strengthen  his  treaty  with  England,  as 
the  unexpected  death  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans  at  this  time  upset  some 
arrangements  in  the  Peace  of  Crepy,  and  he  was  determined  on  keeping 
Milan  to  himself.  Another  set  of  mediators  also  offered  their  services  — 
the  German  Protestants,  who,  though  quite  alienated  from  Henry  for 
years  past  by  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  and  the  divorce  from  Anne  of 
Cleves,  were  alarmed  by  the  near  approach  of  the  General  Council 
summoned  to  meet  at  Trent,  which  did  in  fact  open  its  first  session  in 
December.  Anxious  to  discredit  the  Council,  it  was  important  for  them 
to  make  peace  between  England  and  France,  and  in  November  they  sent 
deputies  to  a  Conference  at  Calais,  which,  though  continued  into  the 
next  month,  proved  as  ineffectual  as  that  at  Brussels. 

Direct  negotiations,  however,  took  place  between  English  and  French 
commissioners  in  May,  1546,  with  the  result  that  peace  was  finally 
concluded  at  Campe,  between  Ardres  and  Guines,  on  June  7,  on  condi- 
tions severe  enough  for  Francis,  binding  him  to  pa}^  all  the  old  pensions 
due  to  England  and  a  further  sum  of  2,000,000  crowns  for  war  expenses 
at  the  end  of  eight  years.  Boulogne  was  to  be  retained  in  Henrj^'s 
hands  till  all  was  paid  ;  but  some  points  were  left  to  be  adjusted  later 
on  ;  and  Henry  agreed  to  the  comprehension  of  the  Scots,  provided  they 
would  be  bound  by  the  treaties  of  1543. 

Meanwhile  he  had  just  achieved  one  great  object  in  Scotland,  which 
he  had  been  clandestinely  pursuing  for  years  in  order  to  get  a  more 
complete  command  of  the  country.  This  was  the  murder  of  Cardinal 
Beton.  He  was  aided  by  factions,  political  and  religious,  Avithin  the 
country ;  for  the  Cardinal  had  caused  one  George  Wishart  to  be  burned 
as  a  heretic  in  front  of  his  Castle  at  St  Andrews  on  March  2,  and 
Wishart's  friends  swore  to  revenge  his  death.  Early  in  the  morning  of 
May  29  a  party  of  them  entered  the  Castle  when  the  drawbridge  was 
down  to  admit  workmen,  struck  down  the  porter  and  threw  him  into 


462         Murder  of  Beton.  — Death  of  Henry  VIII     [io46-7 

the  foss,  then  forced  the  door  of  the  Cardinal's  chamber,  killed  him  and 
hung  out  his  body  over  the  walls.  The  event  caused  Angus,  Maxwell, 
and  others  to  renounce  the  English  alliance  and  strengthen  the  Governor's 
hands  against  the  insurgents.  But  the  Castle  of  St  Andrews  was  a 
strong  fortress  and  could  not  be  starved  out,  as  the  English,  in  whose 
interest  it  was  really  held,  had  the  command  of  the  sea.  Towards  the 
close  of  the  year  the  persons  chiefly  implicated  in  the  murder  escaped  to 
London,  and  those  within  made  a  capitulation  with  the  besiegers  that 
they  would  surrender  as  soon  as  an  absolution  came  from  Rome  for 
the  guilty  parties.  But  this  was  a  mere  policy  to  draw  off  the  besieging 
forces,  for  England  had  no  intention  of  losing  its  hold  on  St  Andrews. 
The  state  of  the  King's  health  was  now  becoming  critical,  and  in  the 
prospect  of  a  minority  there  was  some  speculation  as  to  who  should  have 
the  rule  of  his  successor.  By  virtue  of  his  birth  Norfolk  seemed  highly 
eligible,  and  it  appears  that  his  son  the  Earl  of  Surrey  (the  poet)  not 
only  spoke  of  this  privately,  but  had  a  shield  painted  with  an  alteration 
in  his  coat-of-arms  suitable  only  for  an  heir-apparent  to  the  Crown, 
which  he  kept  secret  from  all  but  his  father  and  his  sister  the  Countess 
of  Richmond.  The  matter,  however,  became  known,  and  he  and  his 
father  were  both  arrested  on  December  12,  and  committed  to  the  Tower. 
Norfolk  signed  a  confession  of  guilt  on  January  12,  1547.  Next  day 
Surrey  was  tried  at  the  Guildhall,  and  he  was  executed  on  the  19th. 
Against  Norfolk  a  Bill  of  Attainder  was  passed  in  Parliament,  and  only 
awaited  the  royal  assent,  for  which  a  commission  was  drawn  on  the  27th  ; 
but  the  King  died  that  night,  and  the  Duke  was  saved. 

The  reign  of  Henry  VIII  has  left  deeper  marks  on  succeeding  ages 
than  any  other  reign  in  English  history.  Nothing  is  more  extraordinary 
than  that  witliin  less  than  a  century  after  Fortescue  had  written  in 
praise  of  the  Constitution  and  Laws  of  England,  a  despotism  so 
complete  should  have  been  set  up  in  that  yqvj  country.  But  it  was 
a  despotism  really  built  upon  the  forms  of  the  constitution  and  due 
mainly  to  the  remarkable  ability  of  the  unscrupulous  King  himself, 
who  was  careful  to  disturb  nothing  that  did  not  really  stand  in  his  way. 
The  enigma,  in  fact,  becomes  quite  intelligible,  when  we  consider  how 
much  weight  the  constitution  itself  allowed  to  the  personal  views  of  a 
very  able  sovereign.  England  was  but  a  country  of  limited  extent, 
without  colonies  or  even  dependencies  except  Ireland,  or  any  continental 
possession  save  Calais.  To  frame  a  policy  for  such  a  nation  required 
little  more  than  one  good  diplomatic  head,  and  when  that  head  was  the 
King's  there  was  not  much  chance  of  controlling  him.  Henry  VIII  was 
really  a  monarch  of  consummate  ability,  who,  if  his  course  had  not  been 
misdirected  by  passion  and  selfishness,  would  have  left  a  name  behind 
him  as  the  very  founder  of  England's  greatness.  Not  only  was  his 
judgment  strong  and  clear,  but  he  knew  well  how  to  select  advisers.     To 


Absolutism  of  Henry  VIII  463 

talk  of  parliamentary  control  is  out  of  the  question.  The  King  called 
Parliament  only  when  he  wanted  money,  or  when  he  wished  despotic 
measures  passed  with  a  semblance  of  popular  sanction.  But  the  forms 
of  Parliamentary  legislation  and  control  were  kept  up  ;  and  thus,  with 
weaker  Kings  and  a  more  effective  popular  sentiment,  the  ancient 
assembly  afterwards  proved  able  to  recover  all  and  more  than  all  its 
former  authority. 

The  old  nobility  were  the  King's  natural  advisers  ;  the  Commons 
could  scarcely  as  yet  be  called  a  real  power  in  the  State.  But  the 
old  nobility  were  reduced  in  numbers,  and  were  no  match  for  him  in 
intelligence.  They  were  superseded,  moreover,  in  the  end,  by  a  new 
nobility  created  by  himself  out  of  the  middle  classes.  Meanwhile,  he 
took  counsel  both  of  noblemen  and  of  commoners  just  as  suited  himself, 
and  he  soon  found  out  who  served  him  best.  Early  in  the  reign  he 
made  large  use  of  churchmen,  such  as  Warham,  Fox,  Wolsey,  Pace,  and 
Gardiner  ;  for  churchmen  were  generally  men  of  greater  penetration 
than  ordinary  lay  agents  of  the  Crown.  A  perceptible  change  took 
place  in  this  matter,  when  with  Cromwell's  aid  he  compelled  the  Church 
to  acknowledge  Royal  Supremacy  and  disown  the  Pope's  authority. 
The  churchmen  then  promoted  were  only  those  who  fell  in  with  the 
new  policy  and  who,  occupied  in  enforcing  it  on  the  clergy,  were  not 
capable  of  much  service  in  framing  Acts  of  State  or  assisting  in  secular 
government.  For  in  truth  this  great  ecclesiastical  revolution  was  that 
which  completed  and  consolidated  the  fabric  of  Henry's  despotism. 
If  among  the  laity  he  had  neither  lord  nor  commoner  who  durst 
withstand  him,  there  were  churchmen  like  some  of  the  Observant  Friars 
who  actually  spoke  out  against  the  public  scandal  which  he  was  creating 
by  repudiating  his  lawful  wife  ;  and  the  King  felt,  truly  enough,  that 
if  he  was  to  have  his  way,  the  voice  of  the  Church  must  be  either 
silenced  or  perverted.  So  the  central  authority  of  Christendom  was  no 
longer  to  determine  what  was  right  or  wrong.  In  England  the  Church 
must  be  under  Royal  Supremacy. 

To  this  decisive  breach  with  Rome  Henry  himself  was  driven  with 
some  reluctance  ;  for  no  King  was  at  first  more  devoted  to  the  Church  or 
more  desirous  to  stand  well  in  the  opinion  of  his  own  subjects.  Nor 
could  it  be  said  that  the  Church's  yoke  was  a  painful  one  to  mighty 
potentates  like  him.  But  wilfulness  and  obstinacy  were  very  strong 
features  of  Henry's  character.  Whatever  he  did  he  must  never  appear 
to  retract ;  and  he  had  so  frequently  threatened  the  Pope  with  the 
withdrawal  of  his  allegiance  in  case  he  would  not  grant  him  his  divorce 
that  at  last  he  felt  bound  to  make  good  what  he  had  threatened.  For 
the  first  time  in  history  Europe  beheld  a  great  prince  deliberately  with- 
draw himself  and  his  subjects  from  the  spiritual  domain  of  Rome,  and 
enforce  by  the  severest  penalties  the  repudiation  of  papal  authority. 
For  the  first  time  also  Europe  realised  how  weak  the  Papacy  had  become 


464  The  new  conditions  of  religion 

when  it  was  proved  unable  to  punish  such  aggression.  Foreign  nations 
were  scandalised,  but  no  foreign  prince  could  afford  lightly  to  quarrel 
with  England.  Henry  was  considered  an  enemy  of  Christianity  much 
as  was  the  Turk,  but  the  prospect  of  a  crusade  against  him,  though  at 
times  it  looked  fairly  probable,  always  vanished  in  the  end.  Foreign 
princes  were  too  suspicious  of  each  other  to  act  together  in  this,  and 
Henry  himself,  by  his  own  wary  policy,  contrived  to  ward  off  the 
danger.  He  was  anxious  to  show  that  the  faith  of  Christendom 
was  maintained  as  firmly  within  his  kingdom  as  ever.  He  made  Cran- 
mer  a  sort  of  insular  Pof»e,  and  insisted  on  respect  being  paid  to  his 
decrees  —  especially  in  reference  to  his  own  numerous  marriages  and 
divorces.  But,  beyond  the  suspension  of  the  canon  law  and  the  com- 
plete subjugation  of  the  clergy  to  the  civil  power,  he  was  not  anxious 
to  make  vital  changes  in  religion  ;  and  both  doctrine  and  ritual  remained 
in  his  day  nearly  unaltered.  The  innovations  actually  made  consisted 
in  little  more  than  the  authorisation  of  an  English  Bible,  the  publication 
of  some  formularies  to  which  little  objection  could  be  taken,  and  — 
what  has  not  been  mentioned  above  —  the  first  use  of  an  English  Litany. 
For  though  as  yet  there  was  no  English  prayer-book,  a  Litany  in  the 
common  tongue  was  ordered  in  1544  when  the  King  was  about  to  em- 
bark for  France. 

The  Authorised  English  Bible  was  undoubtedly  a  new  force  in  the 
religious  history  of  England.  Wiclif's  Bible  had  preceded  it  by 
more  than  a  century,  and  there  had  been  earlier  translations  still.  But 
Wiclif's  attempt  to  popularise  the  Scriptures  in  an  English  form 
had  been  disapproved  of  by  the  Church,  which  considered  the  clergy  as 
the  special  custodians  and  interpreters  of  Holy  Writ,  without  whose 
guidance  it  could  too  easily  be  perverted  and  misconstrued.  This  was 
the  feeling  which  inspired  the  constitution  of  Archbishop  Arundel  in 
1408,  forbidding  the  use  of  any  translation  which  had  not  been  approved 
by  the  diocesan  of  the  place  or  by  some  provincial  council.  In  days 
when  the  sacred  writings  were  only  multiplied  by  cop3'ists,  translations 
of  particular  books  of  Scripture,  or  even  of  the  whole,  might  be  episcopally 
authorised,  if  good  in  themselves,  as  luxuries  for  private  use,  without 
apparent  prejudice  to  the  faith.  But  Wiclif's  version  was  regarded  as 
a  deliberate  attempt  to  vulgarise  a  literature  of  peculiar  sanctity  which 
required  careful  exposition  by  men  of  learning.  The  vernacular  Bible, 
however,  was  prized  by  many  laymen,  even  in  the  fifteenth  century,  and 
certainly  influenced  not  a  little  the  religious  thought  of  the  period  ;  for, 
in  opposition  to  the  special  claims  of  the  Church,  the  Lollards  set  up 
a  theory  that  Scripture  was  the  only  true  authority  for  any  religious 
observances  and  that  no  special  learning  was  required  to  interpret  it, 
the  true  meaning  of  Holy  Writ  being  always  revealed  to  men  of  real 
humility  of  mind.  This  was  also  the  idea  of  Tyndale,  who,  encouraged 
by  a  London  merchant,  went  abroad  and  printed  for  importation  into 


Translations  of  the  Bible  465 

England  a  translation  he  had  made  of  the  New  Testament,  not  from  the 
Latin  Vulgate,  like  Wiclif's,  but  from  the  original  Greek  text ;  his  aim 
being,  as  he  said  himself,  to  make  a  ploughboy  know  the  Scriptures 
even  better  than  a  divine. 

The  invention  of  printing  gave  Tyndale's  translation  an  immense 
advantage  over  its  predecessors.  It  was  smuggled  into  England  and 
found  no  lack  of  purchasers,  who  were  obliged  to  keep  it  in  secrecy. 
But  every  effort  was  used  by  authorit}^  to  put  it  down.  Copies  Avere 
bought  up  by  the  Bishops  in  the  hope  that  the  whole  impression  would 
be  suppressed  ;  and  there  was  more  than  one  burning  of  the  books  in 
St  Paul's  Churchyard.  But  the  effect  was  only  to  encourage  Tyndale 
to  print  off  further  copies  and  extend  the  scope  of  his  labours  ;  for  he 
went  on  to  translate  some  books  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  Hebrew. 
And  in  England,  though  his  New  Testament  was  denounced  as  erroneous 
and  heretical  (no  doubt  the  language  in  many  parts  tended  to  discredit 
Church  authority),  yet  the  obvious  thought  presented  itself  that  the 
best  way  to  counteract  the  poison  of  an  erroneous  version  would  be  the 
issue  of  one  that  was  accurate  and  scholarly.  So  in  June,  1530,  when 
a  royal  proclamation  was  issued  for  the  suppression  of  Tyndale's  and 
other  heretical  books,  it  was  intimated  that,  though  translation  of  the 
Scriptures  was  not  in  itself  a  necessary  thing,  yet,  if  corrupt  transla- 
tions were  meanwhile  laid  aside  and  the  people  forsook  mischievous 
opinions,  the  King  intended  hereafter  to  have  those  writings  translated 
into  English  "  by  great,  learned,  and  Catholic  persons." 

A  few  years  later,  Cromwell  having  become  Vicegerent  in  spiritual 
matters.  Miles  Coverdale  under  his  secret  patronage  brought  out  in 
October,  1535,  a  complete  English  Bible,  not,  like  Tyndale's,  translated 
from  the  Greek  and  Hebrew,  but,  as  the  title-page  announced,  from  the 
"  Dutch  "  (meaning  the  German)  and  Latin  —  in  fact,  an  English  version 
of  the  Vulgate  amended  by  comparison  with  the  German  Bible  of  Luther. 
This  work,  however,  though  dedicated  to  the  King,  was  not  issued  by 
authority  ;  and  though  Cromwell's  injunctions  of  1536  required  every 
church  to  be  supplied  within  a  twelvemonth  with  a  wliole  Bible  "  in 
Latin  and  also  in  English,"  the  direction  could  not  have  been  obeyed. 
In  1537  appeared  Matthew's  Bible  which  was  really  made  up  of  Tyndale's 
version  of  the  New  Testament  and  of  the  Old  Testament  as  far  as  the 
Second  Book  of  Chronicles,  the  other  Books  of  the  Old  Testament  being 
supplied  from  Coverdale  with  alterations.  Its  origin  would  not  have 
pleased  the  Bishops,  but  the  facts  were  concealed  ;  and,  a  copy  being  sub- 
mitted to  Cranmer,  he  wrote  to  Cromwell  that  he  thought  it  should  be 
licensed  till  the  Bishops  could  set  forth  a  better,  which  he  did  not  expect 
they  would  ever  do.  The  King  approved  ;  Grafton  and  Whitchurch,  the 
printers,  were  allowed  to  sell  it ;  and  its  sale  was  forced  upon  the  clergy 
by  new  injunctions  from  Cromwell  in  1538.  Another  and  more  luxurious 
edition,  however,  was  called  for,  and  Grafton  went  to  Paris  to  see  it 

C.   M.   H.    II.  30 


466  W^^i^  ^f  ^^^^  English  Bible 

printed,  with  Coverdale's  aid  as  corrector,  on  the  best  of  paper  with  the 
best  tyi30graphic  art  of  the  day.  This  work  was  far  advanced  when  it 
was  stopjjed  by  the  French  Inquisition ;  but  Coverdale  and  Grafton 
succeeded  in  conveying  away  the  presses,  type,  and  a  company  of  French 
compositors,  by  whose  aid  the  work  was  finished  in  London  in  April,  1539. 

That  edition  was  known  as  "  the  Great  Bible.''  It  was  issued  by  the 
King's  authority  and  Cromwell's  ;  but  the  clergy  were  by  no  means 
pleased  with  the  translation,  which  they  severely  censured  in  Convocation 
in  1542,  two  years  after  Cromwell's  death.  They  appointed  committees 
of  the  best  Hebrew  and  Greek  scholars  to  revise  it  ;  but  the  King  sent 
a  message  through  Cranmer  forbidding  them  to  proceed,  as  he  intended 
to  submit  the  work  to  the  two  Universities.  This  was  simply  a  false 
pretence  to  stop  revision  ;  for  a  patent  was  immediately  granted  to 
Anthony  Marlar,  giving  to  him  instead  of  Grafton,  who  was  now  in 
disgrace,  the  sole  right  of  printing  the  Bible  for  four  years.  The  Great 
Bible  continued  to  be  used  in  churches,  and  six  were  set  up  in  St  Paul's 
Cathedral  for  general  use. 

These  were  the  principal  translations  issued  in  Henry  VIII's  time  ; 
and  authority  being  given  for  their  use,  those,  who  maintained  the  old 
Lollard  theory  that  the  Bible  could  be  safely  interpreted  without  the 
aid  of  a  priesthood,  were  encouraged  in  their  opposition  to  the  Church. 
This  theory  was  clearly  gaining  in  strength  during  the  latter  part  of 
Henry's  reign  and  its  adherents  became  still  more  numerous  in  that  of 
his  son.  Men  founded  their  convictions  on  an  infallible  book,  were 
confident  in  their  own  judgments,  and  died  by  hundreds  under  Mary  for 
beliefs  that  were  oidy  exceptionally  held  in  the  beginning  of  her  father's 
reign.  The  pure  delight  in  the  sacred  literature  itself  inspired  many 
with  enthusiasm ;  and  among  otlier  results  we  find  the  musician  INIarbeck, 
who  knew  no  Latin,  compiling  a  Concordance  to  the  English  Bible,  and 
the  heroic  Anne  Askew,  when  examined  for  heresy,  full  of  scriptural 
texts  and  references  in  defending  herself. 

These  cases,  and  especially  the  last,  deserve  more  than  a  passing 
mention.  Some  account  has  been  already  given  of  martyrdoms,  both 
for  refusal  to  acknowledge  the  Royal  Supremacy  and  for  doctrines  of  a 
novel  kind.  But  the  results  of  the  severe  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  have 
not  as  yet  been  touched  upon.  They  were  not,  in  truth,  so  appalling  as 
might  have  been  expected.  The  presentments  at  first  were  quashed,  and 
new  regulations  were  made  about  procedure,  which,  with  further  modifi- 
cations passed  by  Statute,  considerably  abated  the  terrors  of  the  Act. 
But  in  1543,  just  after  the  King's  marriage  with  Catharine  Parr,  four 
men  of  Windsor  were  found  guilty  of  heresy,  of  whom  three  were  burned 
at  the  Castle,  and  one  was  pardoned.  The  man  pardoned  was  John 
Marbeck,  the  celebrated  musician  just  referred  to,  who  possibly  owed 
his  escape  in  part  to  his  musical  talents  ;  for  he  was  organist  of  St 
George's  Chapel.     Yet  it  does  not  seem  that  he  had  really  transgressed 


Anne  Askeiv. — Dissolution  of  the  monasteries      467 

the  law  ill  anything  ;  and  Bishop  Wakeman  of  Hereford,  at  his  examina- 
tion, said  with  reference  to  his  Concordance,  "  This  man  hath  been  better 
occupied  than  a  great  sort  of  our  priests." 

In  1546  the  victims  of  the  Six  Articles  seem  to  have  been  more 
numerous,  and  the  chief  sufferer  was  a  zealous  lady  separated  from  her 
husband,  and  known  by  her  maiden  name  of  Anne  Askew.  She  and 
three  others  were  tried  at  the  Guildhall  for  heresy,  and  confessed  opinions 
about  the  Sacrament  for  which  they  were  all  condemned  to  the  stake. 
Two  of  her  fellows  next  day  (one  of  them,  Shaxton,  had  been  Bishop 
of  Salisbury)  yielded  to  the  exhortations  of  Bishops  Bonner  and  Heath, 
and  were  saved  on  being  reconciled  to  the  Church  ;  but  Anne  was 
resolute,  and  would  not  be  persuaded  even  by  the  Council,  before  whom 
she  disputed  for  two  days  when  they  evidently  wished  to  save  her, 
answering  continually  in  language  borrowed  from  Scripture.  She  was 
committed  to  Newgate  and  afterwards  to  the  Tower,  where  she  was 
racked  some  time  before  she  was  burnt  at  Smithfield.  Suspicions  seem 
to  have  been  entertained  that  she  was  supported  in  her  heresies  by  some 
of  the  ladies  about  Queen  Catharine  Parr,  and  she  was  tortured  to 
reveal  her  confederates  ;  but  she  denied  that  she  had  any.  Tlie  story  of 
her  examination  and  torture  written  by  her  own  hand  and  printed 
abroad  for  the  English  market,  certainly  added  new  force  to  the  coming 
revolution. 

There  was  indeed  another  great  change  bearing  on  religion  and 
social  life,  though  not  much  on  doctrine  or  ritual  —  the  dissolution  of 
the  monasteries.  Its  immediate  effect  was  to  produce  a  vast  amount  of 
suffering.  It  is  true  that  a  considerable  number  of  the  monks  and  nuns 
received  pensions,  but  very  many  were  turned  out  of  the  houses  which 
had  been  their  homes  and  wandered  about  in  search  of  means  to  live. 
Even  at  the  first  suppression  Chapuys  was  told  that,  what  with  monks, 
nuns,  and  dependents  on  monasteries,  there  must  have  been  20,000 
persons  cast  adrift  ;  and  though  this  was  evidently  a  vague  and  probably 
exaggerated  estimate,  it  indicates  at  least  very  widespread  wretchedness 
and  discomfort.  More  permanent  results,  however,  arose  out  of  the  pro- 
digious transfer  of  property,  affecting,  as  it  is  supposed,  about  a  third  of 
the  land  of  England.  It  has  been  doubted  whether  the  monks  liad  been 
easy  landlords  ;  but  when  the  monastic  lands  were  confiscated  and  sold 
to  a  host  of  greedy  courtiers  the  change  was  severely  felt.  The  lands 
were  all  let  at  higher  rents,  and  the  newly-erected  Court  "  for  the 
Augmentation  of  the  Crown  Revenues'"  did  its  best  to  justify  its  title. 
Moreover,  the  purchasers,  in  order  to  make  the  most  of  their  new  acqui- 
sitions, began  to  enclose  commons  where  poor  tenants  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  graze  their  cattle  ;  the  tenants  sold  the  beasts  which  they  could 
not  feed,  and  the  cost  of  living  in  a  few  years  advanced  very  seriously. 
This  was  one  of  the  main  causes  of  Ket's  rebellion  in  the  following  reign. 

Meanwhile,  all  over  the  country  men  beheld  with  sadness  a  host  of 


468  Effects  of  their  suppressio7i 

deserted  buildings  with  ruined  walls,  where  formerly  rich  and  poor  used 
to  receive  hospitality  on  their  travels  ;  where  gentlemen  could  obtain 
loans  on  easy  terms  or  deposit  precious  documents,  as  in  places  more 
secure  than  their  own  homes  ;  where  the  needy  always  found  relief  and 
shelter,  and  where  spiritual  wants  were  attended  to  no  less  than  physical. 
The  blank  was  felt  particularly  in  solitary  and  mountainous  districts, 
where  the  monks  had  assisted  travellers,  often  commercial  travellers  and 
"  baggers  of  corn,"  whose  services  were  most  useful  to  the  country  side, 
with  men  and  horses  to  pursue  their  journeys  in  safety.  "  Also  the 
abbeys,"  said  Aske,  "  was  one  of  the  beauties  of  this  realm  to  all 
men  and  strangers  passing  through  the  same ;  all  gentlemen  much 
succoured  in  their  needs  with  money,  their  younger  sons  there  succoured, 
and  in  nunneries  their  daughters  brought  up  in  virtue,  and  also  their 
evidences  (i.e.  title-deeds)  and  money  left  to  the  uses  of  infants  in 
abbeys'  hands  —  always  sure  there.  And  such  abbeys  as  were  near  the 
danger  of  seabanks  great  maintainers  of  seawalls  and  dykes,  main- 
tainers  and  builders  of  bridges  and  highways  [and]  such  other  things 
for  the  commonwealth." 

What  arts  and  industries  disappeared  or  were  driven  into  other 
channels  on  the  fall  of  the  monasteries  is  a  matter  for  reflexion. 
Rural  labour,  of  course,  still  went  on  where  it  was  necessary  for  the 
support  of  life  ;  but  some  arts,  formerly  brought  to  high  perfection  in 
monastic  seclusion,  were  either  paralysed  for  a  time  or  migrated  into 
the  towns.  Sculpture,  embroidery,  clockmaking,  bellfounding,  were 
among  these ;  and  it  is  needless  to  speak  of  what  literature  owes  to  the 
transcribers  of  manuscripts  and  the  composers  of  monastic  chronicles. 
True,  monasticism  had  long  been  on  the  decline  before  it  was  swept  away, 
and  monastic  chronicles  were  already,  one  might  say,  things  of  the  past ; 
but  it  was  in  monasteries  also  that  the  first  printing-presses  were  set  up, 
and  the  art  which  superseded  that  of  the  transcriber  was  cherished  by  the 
same  influence.  Finally,  the  education  of  the  people  was  largely  due  to 
the  convent  schools  ;  and  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  suffered  very  severely 
not  only  from  the  suppression  of  the  monasteries,  but  perhaps  even  more 
from  the  confiscation  of  chantries  which  began  at  the  end  of  the  reign, 
for  the  chantry  priest  was  often  the  local  schoolmaster.  Nor  did  the 
boasted  educational  foundations  of  Edward  VI  do  much  to  redress  the 
wrong,  for  in  truth  his  schools  were  old  schools  refounded  with  poorer 
endowments. 

Still  more  did  the  higher  education  of  the  country  suffer  ;  for  the 
monasteries  had  been  in  the  habit  of  sending  up  scholars  to  the  univer- 
sities and  often  maintained  some  of  their  own  junior  members  there  to 
complete  their  education.  After  the  Suppression,  consequently,  univer- 
sity studies  went  gradually  to  deca}',  and  few  men  studied  for  degrees. 
In  the  six  years  from  1542  to  1548  only  191  students  were  admitted 
bachelors  of  arts  at  Cambridge  and  only  173  at  Oxford.   The  foundation 


Agrarian  legislation  and  Poor  Laivs  469 

of  Regius  Professorships  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge  was  a  slight  compen- 
sation. The  dispersion  of  valuable  monastic  libraries,  moreover,  was  to 
some  extent  counteracted  by  the  efforts  of  Leland,  the  antiquary,  in  his 
tour  through  England  to  preserve  some  of  their  choicest  treasures  for 
the  King. 

Altogether,  no  such  sweeping  .changes  had  been  known  for  centuries. 
As  regards  the  land  some  of  the  results  may  have  been  in  the  end  for 
good.  Better  husbandry  and  new  modes  of  farming,  no  doubt,  succeeded 
in  developing  more  fully  the  resources  of  the  soil.  A  check,  too,  was 
doubtless  placed  on  indiscriminate  charity.  But  problems  were  raised 
which  were  new  in  kind.  At  the  beginning  of  the  reign  the  chief  evils 
felt  were  depopulation,  vagrancy,  and  thieves.  Economic  laws,  of  course, 
were  not  understood  ;  and  attempts  were  made  by  legislation  to  prevent 
husbandmen's  dwellings  being  thrown  down  by  landlords,  who  found 
it  profitable  to  devote  arable  land  to  pasture  to  increase  the  growth 
of  wool.  The  frequent  repetition  of  these  Acts  only  shows  how  in- 
effective they  were  in  practice  ;  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth 
century  they  had  become  so  complicated  that  Coke  rejoiced  at  their 
repeal.  But  the  evils  of  vagrancj^  and  poverty  assumed  new  forms. 
The  precise  effect  of  the  fall  of  the  monasteries  upon  pauperism  is  not 
altogether  easy  to  estimate  ;  but  the  statement  of  Chapuys  removes  all 
doubt  that  it  was  the  immediate  cause  of  bitter  penury.  The  evidence 
of  the  Statute-book  on  this  point  requires  careful  interpretation  ;  for  it 
was  only  in  a  later  age  that  law  was  invoked  to  do  the  duty  of  charity. 
Down  to  the  middle  of  Henry  VIIFs  reign  repeated  Acts  had  been 
passed  for  the  punishment  of  sturdy  beggars  and  vagabonds  :  but  it 
gradually  came  to  be  perceived  that  this  problem  could  not  be  dealt 
with  apart  from  relief  of  the  deserving  poor.  In  1536  the  same  session 
of  Parliament  which  dissolved  the  smaller  monasteries  passed  an  Act  for 
the  systematic  maintenance  of  paupers  by  charitable  collections  ;  and,  in 
the  first  year  of  Edward  VI,  Parliament  for  the  first  time  attempted  to 
deal  with  the  two  problems  together,  with  penalties  of  atrocious  severity 
against  vagabonds.  But  severity  was  futile  ;  the  Act  was  speedily 
repealed,  and  under  Elizabeth  a  regular  system  of  Poor  Law  relief  was 
established. 

From  the  beginning  of  his  reign  Henry  had  been  profuse  in  his 
expenditure.  His  tastes  were  luxurious  and  he  gratified  them  to  a  large 
extent  at  the  cost  of  others.  He  made  Wolsey  present  him  with 
Hampton  Court ;  after  the  Cardinal's  fall  he  took  York  Place  and 
called  it  Whitehall ;  he  purchased  from  Eton  College  the  Hospital  of 
St  James,  made  it  into  a  palace,  and  laid  out  St  James'  Park ;  he  built 
Nonsuch  and  made  another  large  park  in  the  neighbourhood.  Before  he 
had  been  many  years  King,  the  enormous  wealth  left  him  by  his  father 
must  have  been  nearly  all  dissipated.  Yet  the  subsidies  he  required 
from  Parliament  were  very  moderate  till  1523,  .when,  as  we  have  seen, 


470     Oppressim  taxation. — Debasement  of  the  coinage 

unprecedented  taxation  was  imposed  for  the  French  war  in  addition  to  a 
forced  loan,  from  repayment  of  which  he  was  absolved  by  the  legislature 
in  the  year  of  Wolsey's  fall.  Then  in  a  few  years  followed  the  pillage 
of  the  monasteries,  while  throughout  the  reign  there  were  numerous 
attainders  involving  large  confiscations.  In  addition  to  this  immense 
booty  came  further  subsidies,  a  further  forced  loan  for  a  new  war  with 
France,  and  a  new  release  by  Parliament  from  the  duty  of  repayment. 
Finall}^  to  relieve  an  exhausted  exchequer,  the  King  was  driven  to  the  ex- 
pedient of  debasing  the  currency.  In  1542  a  gold  coinage  was  issued  of  23 
carats  fine  and  1  carat  of  alloy,  with  a  silver  coinage  of  10  oz.  pure  silver 
to  2  oz.  of  alloy.  In  1544  the  gold  was  still  23  carats  fine,  but  the  silver 
was  only  9  oz.  to  3  oz.  of  alloy.  In  1545  the  gold  was  22  carats  and 
the  silver  6  oz.  to  6  oz.  of  alloy.  In  1546  the  gold  was  only  20  carats 
and  the  silver  4  oz.  to  8  oz.  of  alloy.  This  rapid  deterioration  of  the 
money,  though  it  brought  a  profit  to  the  King  in  the  last  year  of 
X5.  2s.  in  the  coinage  of  every  pound  weight  of  gold,  and  of  X4.  4s. 
on  every  pound  weight  of  silver,  produced,  of  course,  the  most  serious 
consequences  to  the  public.  Apart  from  this,  no  doubt,  prices  must 
soon  have  been  affected  by  the  quantity  of  silver  and  gold  poured  into 
Europe  from  Mexican  and  Peruvian  mines.  But  the  great  issue  of  base 
money  in  this  and  the  following  reign  produced  a  complete  derangement 
of  commerce  and  untold  inconvenience,  not  only  by  the  sudden  alteration 
of  values  but  by  the  want  of  confidence  which  it  everj^where  inspired. 
Not  till  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  could  a  remedy  be  effectually 
applied  to  so  great  an  evil. 

The  King's  high-handed  proceedings,  alike  as  regards  the  Church, 
the  monasteries,  and  the  coinage,  lowered  the  moral  tone  of  the  whole 
community.  Men  lost  faith  in  their  religion.  Greedy  courtiers  sprang 
up  eager  for  grants  of  abbey  lands.  A  new  nobility  was  raised  out  of 
the  money-getting  middle  classes,  and  a  host  of  placemen  enriched  them- 
selves by  continual  peculation.  Covetousness  and  fraud  reigned  in  the 
highest  places. 

Yet  "  there  is  some  soul  of  goodness  in  things  evil,"  and  the  same 
policy  that  under  Henry  VIII  destroyed  the  autonomy  of  the  Church 
and  suppressed  the  monasteries  made  him  seek  not  only  to  unify  his 
kingdom  but  to  bring  together  the  British  Islands  under  one  single  rule. 
England,  itself,  no  doubt,  was  a  united  country  at  his  accession,  but  its 
cohesion  was  not  perfect.  Wales  and  the  north  country  beyond  Trent 
each  required  somewhat  special  government;  and  Ireland,  of  course, 
was  a  problem  by  itself.  Yet  no  serious  perplexities  had  grown  up 
when  in  1525  the  King  sent  his  bastard  son,  the  Duke  of  Richmond, 
into  Yorkshire,  with  a  Council  to  govern  the  north,  and  his  daughter 
Mary,  with  another  Council,  to  hold  a  Court  on  the  borders  of  Wales 
for  the  settlement  of  disputes  in  that  country  without  reference  to  the 
Courts  at  Westminster.     This  arrangement  was  soon  set  aside  when 


Unification  of  the  kingdom. — Ireland  471 

Mary's  legitimacy  was  questioned,  and  the  disaffection  of  Rice  ap  Griffith, 
whose  father  and  grandfather  had  governed  Wales  for  Henry  VII, 
was  undoubtedly  connected  with  the  Divorce  question.  A  little  later  a 
new  Council  for  the  Marches  was  set  up  under  Roland  Lee,  whom  the 
King  appointed  Bishop  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield ;  and  by  several  suc- 
cessive Acts  of  Parliament  Wales  itself  was  divided  into  shires,  and  the 
administration  of  justice  in  the  principality  assimilated  to  that  which 
prevailed  in  England,  only  with  a  Great  Sessions  held  twice  a  year  in 
every  county  instead  of  quarterly  assizes.  The  admission  of  twenty- 
seven  members  for  Welsh  constituencies  to  the  English  Parliament 
completed  the  union  of  the  principality  with  the  kingdom. 

Of  a  similar  tendency  was  an  Act  of  the  King's  27th  year,  by  which 
the  old  prerogatives  of  counties  palatine  were  abolished,  and  the  sole 
power  of  appointing  justices  or  pardoning  offences  over  the  whole  king- 
dom restored  to  the  Crown.  Of  the  beneficial  results  of  these  changes 
it  is  impossible  to  doubt,  especially  in  Wales,  where  "  gentlemen  thieves  " 
had  been  a  good  deal  too  influential.  The  north  of  England  was  less 
easily  coerced,  and  after  the  severe  measures  taken  by  Norfolk  to  put 
down  the  rebellion  a  new  Council  of  the  North  was  established,  first 
under  Bishop  Tunstall  of  Durham,  afterwards  under  Bishop  Holgate  of 
Llandaff.  This  Council  which,  like  that  of  Wales,  was  abolished  by  the 
Long  Parliament  in  1641,  was  undoubtedly  without  parliamentary 
authority;  it  acted  merely  by  the  deputed  authority  of  the  Crown. 
Yet  its  acts  could  scarcely  have  been  felt  as  extremely  tyrannical  after 
the  submission  of  the  whole  country  in  1537,  renewed  to  the  King  him- 
self when  he  went  thither  in  1541. 

In  Ireland  the  King's  policy  was  after  many  years  wonderfully  suc- 
cessful. Early  in  the  reign  he  had  allowed  the  Earl  of  Kildare,  as  Lord 
Deputy,  to  manage  everything,  to  treat  his  own  enemies  as  the  King's 
and  appropriate  their  confiscated  lands.  This,  however,  could  not  last, 
and  in  1520  the  Earl  of  Surrey  was  sent  over  as  Deputy,  who  with  the 
aid  of  Sir  Piers  Butler  set  about  reducing  the  land  to  subjection. 
He  made  a  good  beginning  and  handed  over  the  work  to  Sir  Piers ;  but 
the  feud  between  the  Geraldines  and  the  Butlers  made  government 
impossible.  Kildare  was  restored  for  a  time,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  had 
to  be  recalled,  whereupon  his  son,  becoming  the  Pope's  chamijion,  almost 
wrested  for  a  time  the  whole  government  of  Ireland  froni  the  King. 
But  before  many  years  the  Geraldines  were  completely  crushed,  and 
young  Kildare  and  his  five  uncles  were  hanged  at  Tyburn.  Lord 
Leonard  Grey's  government,  however,  was  complained  of ;  he  was  re- 
called and  sent  to  the  block.  It  was  under  his  successor,  St  Leger,  that 
real  progress  Avas  at  last  made.  Without  attempting  distant  expeditions 
he  endeavoured  first  of  all  to  make  the  Pale  secure,  and  by  and  by 
induced  the  Irish  chieftains  to  submit,  accepting  titles  from  the  King  and 
renouncing  the  Pope's  spiritual  authority.     The  triumph  was  completed 


472  The  navy 


by  the  passing  of  Acts  both  in  the  Irish  and  in  the  English  Parliament  by 
which  the  King's  style  was  altered  to  "King"  instead  of  "lord"  of 
Ireland.  The  new  style  was  proclaimed  in  England  on  January  23, 
1542.  When  Irish  chieftains  sat  in  a  Dublin  Parliament  as  earls  and 
barons,  with  the  quondam  head  of  the  Irish  knights  of  St  John  as 
Viscount  Clontarf,  a  great  step  had  evidently  been  taken  towards  con- 
ciliation. In  1542  it  was  announced  that  Ireland  was  actually  at  peace; 
and,  although  this  state  of  matters  did  not  continue,  the  end  of  the  reign 
was  comparatively  untroubled. 

Thus  Henry,  notwithstanding  his  defiance  of  the  Pope,  was  wonder- 
fully successful  in  making  himself  secure  at  home.  Abroad  he  had 
warded  off  the  danger  of  any  attempt  at  invasion  to  enforce  the  papal 
excommunication  by  continually  fomenting  the  mutual  jealousies  of  the 
two  leading  princes  on  the  Continent.  The  time  came,  however,  when, 
neutrality  being  no  longer  possible,  he  prepared  to  throw  in  his  lot  with 
the  Emperor  against  France  ;  and  it  was  in  view  of  a  war  with  France, 
as  we  have  seen,  that  he  attempted,  just  when  Ireland  had  been  pacified, 
to  get  Scotland  completely  under  his  power  —  a  task  which  proved  too 
much  both  for  him  and  for  his  successor. 

Naturally,  the  navy  and  the  defence  of  the  coast  occupied  much  of 
this  King's  attention.  From  the  earliest  years  of  his  reign,  indeed, 
Henry  took  much  interest  in  his  ships.  Trinity  House  owes  its  origin 
to  a  guild  founded  by  royal  licence  at  Deptford  Strand  before  he  had 
been  four  years  upon  the  throne.  Earlier  still,  when  the  Regent  was 
burned  in  1512,  he  immediately  set  about  the  building  of  the  G-reat 
Harry ^  on  board  of  which  he  received  a  grand  array  of  ambassadors  and 
Bishops  when  it  was  dedicated  in  June,  1514.  She  was  the  largest 
vessel  then  afloat,  and  her  sailing  qualities  were  no  less  admirable  than 
her  bulk.  In  1522  Admiral  Fitzwilliam  reported  that  she  outsailed  all 
the  ships  of  the  fleet  except  the  unfortunate  Mary  Rose.  The  Royal 
Navy  consisted  commonly  of  about  thirty  or  forty  sail,  but  it  could 
always  be  augmented  from  merchant-shij^s,  or  ships  which  were  private 
property ;  though  it  was  reported  by  Marillac  in  1540  that  there  were 
only  seven  or  eight  vessels  besides  the  King's  which  were  of  more  than 
400  or  500  tons  burden.  Henrj^'s  solicitude  about  his  ships  was  further 
shown  on, the  sinking  of  the  Mary  Rose  before  his  eyes  in  1545.  Next 
year,  for  the  first  time,  a  Navy  Board  was  established. 

The  importance  of  the  command  of  the  sea  was  shown  in  two 
instances  at  the  end  of  the  reign,  when  the  French  besieged  the  English 
in  Boulogne,  and  when  the  Scotch  government  attempted  to  besiege 
Henry's  friends,  the  murderers  of  Cardinal  Beton,  in  St  Andrews.  The 
hold  which  Henry  thus  had  both  on  France  and  Scotland  was  important 
for  his  own  protection ;  and  the  foundation  of  England's  greatness  as  a 
world-power  may  be  traced  to  a  tyrant's  strenuous  efforts  to  defend  his 
own  position.      Of   less  permanent  importance  in  this  way  were  the 


Military  service  473 


numerous  fortifications  he  raised  upon  the  coast.  He  built  Sandgate 
Castle  in  Kent,  Camber  Castle  near  Rye,  and  fortifications  at  Cowes, 
Calshot,  and  Hurst  upon  the  Solent,  and  a  number  of  other  places 
besides. 

As  to  his  army,  for  the  most  part  he  was  not  very  well  served.  The 
policy  of  his  father  had  been  to  prohibit  by  law  the  large  retiniies 
formerly  maintained  by  the  nobles  to  prevent  the  renewal  of  civil  war. 

The  result  was  that,  when  troops  were  needed  for  active  service 
abroad,  the  nobles  had  no  personal  following,  but,  being  each  bound  by 
indenture  to  bring  so  many  soldiers  into  the  field,  hired  men  for  the 
occasion  at  specific  wages.  In  consequence  they  were  raw  and  ill-disci- 
plined ;  and  their  extraordinary  revolt  under  Dorset  in  Spain  in  1512  was 
almost  paralleled  in  1523,  when  Suffolk,  partlj^  by  the  weather  and  partly 
by  the  insubordination  of  his  followers,  was  compelled  to  disband  his 
army  and  return  to  Calais.  After  that  date  there  was  no  great  fighting 
for  nearly  twenty  years,  when  the  King  again  became  involved  both  with 
P'rance  and  with  Scotland.  In  tliis  French  war  he  supplemented  his  own 
forces  by  engaging  German  mercenaries  who  demanded  exorbitant  pay 
and  cheated  him  besides.  He  also  detained  in  England  with  the 
Emperor's  leave  two  Spanish  noblemen  of  great  distinction,  and  took  a 
number  of  their  countrymen  into  his  service,  who  were  delighted  with 
his  liberality.  The  increase  of  English  influence  abroad  during  this 
reign  was  in  fact  due  rather  to  the  personal  qualities  of  the  King,  and 
to  the  skilful  use  which  he  made  of  European  complications,  than  to 
the  number  or  excellence  of  the  troops  at  his  command. 


CHAPTER   XIV 

THE   REFORMATION   UNDER   EDWARD   VI 

"  Woe  unto  thee,  O  land,"  said  the  Preacher,  "  when  thy  king  is 
a  child."  The  truth  of  his  words  did  not  recommend  them  to  the 
Parliament  of  Edward  VI  ;  and,  when  Dr  John  Story  quoted  them  in 
his  protest  against  the  first  Act  of  Uniformity,  he  was  sent  to  expiate 
his  boldness  in  the  Tower.  Yet  he  had  all  the  precedents  in  English 
history  on  his  side.  Disaster  and  civil  strife  had  attended  the  nonage 
of  Henry  III  and  Edward  III,  of  Richard  II  and  Henry  VI  ;  and  the 
evils  inseparable  from  the  rule  of  a  child  had  culminated  in  the  murder 
of  Edward  V.  When,  in  1547,  a  sixth  Edward  ascended  the  throne, 
the  signs  were  few  of  a  break  in  the  uniform  ill-fortune  of  royal 
minorities.  Abroad,  Paul  III  was  scheming  to  recover  the  allegiance 
of  the  schismatic  realm  ;  the  Emperor  was  slowly  crushing  England's 
natural  allies  in  Germany  ;  France  was  watching  her  opportunity  to 
seize  Boulogne  ;  and  England  herself  was  committed  to  a  hazardous 
design  on  Scotland.  At  home,  there  was  a  religious  revolution  half- 
accomplished  and  a  social  revolution  in  ferment  ;  evicted  tenants  and 
ejected  monks  infested  the  land,  centres  of  disorder  and  raw  material 
for  revolt  ;  the  treasury  was  empty,  the  kingdom  in  debt,  the  coinage 
debased.  In  place  of  the  old  nobility  of  blood  stood  a  new  peerage 
raised  on  the  ruins  and  debauched  by  the  spoils  of  the  Church,  and 
created  to  be  docile  tools  in  the  work  of  revolution.  The  royal 
authority,  having  undermined  every  other  support  of  the  political 
fabric,  now  passed  to  a  Council  torn  by  rival  ambitions  and  conflicting 
creeds,  robbed  of  royal  prestige,  and  unbridled  by  the  heavy  hand  that 
had  taught  it  to  serve  but  not  to  direct. 

Henry  VIII  died  at  Whitehall  in  the  early  morning  of  Friday, 
January  28,  1547.  Through  the  night  his  brother-in-law,  the  Earl 
of  Hertford,  and  his  secretary,  Sir  William  Paget,  had  discussed  in  the 
gallery  of  the  palace  arrangements  for  the  coming  reign.  Hertford 
then  started  to  bring  his  nephew,  the  young  King,  from  Hatfield,  while 
Henry's  death  remained  a  secret.  It  was  announced  to  Parliament  and 
Edward  was  proclaimed  early  on  the  following  Monday  morning.  In 
the   afternoon   he   arrived   in    London,  and   an   hour  or  so   later  the 

474 


1547]  The  new  government  475 

Council  met  in  the  Tower.  Its  composition  had  been  determined  on 
St  Stephen's  Day,  five  weeks  before,  when  Henry,  acting  on  an  authority 
specially  granted  him  by  Parliament,  had  drawn  up  a  will,  the  genuine- 
ness of  which  was  not  disputed  until  the  possibility  of  a  Stewart  suc- 
cession drew  attention  to  the  obstacles  it  phiced  in  their  way  to  the 
throne.  But  the  arrangements  made  in  the  will  for  the  regency  destroyed 
the  balance  of  parties  existing  in  Henry's  later  years.  Norfolk  had 
been  sent  to  the  Tower,  and  from  the  sixteen  executors,  w^ho  were  to 
constitute  Edward's  Privy  Council,  Bishops  Gardiner  and  Thirlby  were 
expressly  excluded.  To  the  eleven,  who  had  previously  been  of  Henry's 
Council,  five  were  added ;  two  were  the  Chief  Justices,  Montagu  and 
Bromley,  but  the  other  three,  Denny,  Herbert,  and  North,  were  all 
inclined  towards  religious  change.  Besides  the  sixteen  executors  Henry 
nominated  twelve  assistants,  who  were  only  to  be  called  in  when  the 
others  thought  fit.  Unless,  in  defiance  of  the  testimony  of  those  present 
when  Henry  drew  up  his  will,  that  selection  is  to  be  regarded  as  due 
to  the  intrigues  of  the  Reformers,  it  would  seem  that  Henry  deliberately 
sought  to  smooth  the  way  for  the  Reformation  by  handing  over  the 
government  to  a  Council  committed  to  its  principles.  Not  half  a  dozen 
of  its  members  could  be  trusted  to  offer  the  least  resistance  to  religious 
change  ;  and,  when  the  Council  assembled  in  the  Tower  on  that  Monday 
afternoon,  it  only  met  to  register  a  foregone  conclusion. 

Henry  had  been  given  no  authority  to  nominate  a  Protector ;  but  such 
a  step  was  in  accord  with  precedent  and  with  general  expectation,  and 
one  at  least  of  the  few  conservatives  on  the  Council  thought  that  the 
appointment  of  Hertford  to  tlie  protectorate  afforded  the  best  guarantee 
for  the  good  government  and  security  of  the  realm.  He  was  uncle  to 
the  King,  a  successful  general,  and  a  popular  favourite  ;  and,  though  his 
peerage  was  but  ten  years  old,  it  was  older  than  any  other  that  the 
Council  could  boast.  He  was  to  act  only  on  the  advice  of  his  co- 
executors  ;  but  there  was  apparently  no  opposition  to  his  appointment 
as  Protector  of  the  realm  and  Governor  of  the  King's  person.  On  the 
following  day  the  young  King  and  the  peers  gave  their  assent.  Five 
days  later  Paget  produced  a  list  of  promotions  in  the  peerage  which  he 
said  Henry  had  intended  to  make.  Hertford  became  Duke  of  Somerset, 
and  Lord  High  Treasurer  and  Earl  Marshal  in  succession  to  Norfolk ; 
Lisle  became  Earl  of  Warwick,  and  Wriothesley  Earl  of  Southampton ; 
Essex  was  made  Marquis  of  Northampton,  and  baronies  were  conferred 
on  Sir  Thomas  Seymour,  Rich,  and  Sheffield. 

Half  of  Henry's  alleged  intentions  were  not  fulfilled,  a  strong 
argument  in  favour  of  their  genuineness ;  Russell  and  St  John  had  to 
wait  for  their  promised  earldoms,  and  seven  others  for  their  baronies, 
nor  would  Paget  have  then  selected  Wriothesley  for  promotion.  For 
scarcely  was  Edward  crowned  (February  20)  and  Henry  buried,  when 
the  Lord-Chancellor  fell  from  power.     He  had  been  peculiarly  identified 


476  Protector  Somerset  [1547 

with  the  reactionary  policy  of  Henry's  later  years ;  and  his  ambition  and 
ability  inspired  his  colleagues  with  a  distrust  which  increased  when  it  was 
found  that,  in  order  to  devote  more  time  to  politics,  he  had,  without 
obtaining  a  warrant  from  the  Council,  issued  a  commission  for  the 
transaction  of  Chancery  business  during  his  absence.  A  complaint 
Avas  at  once  lodged  by  the  common  lawj^ers,  ever  jealous  of  the 
Chancery  side,  and  the  judges  unanimously  declared  that  Southampton 
had  forfeited  the  Chancellorship. 

A  more  important  change  ensued.  Doubts  of  the  validity  of  a  dead 
King's  commission  had  already  led  the  Chancellor  to  seek  reappointment 
at  tlie  hands  of  his  living  sovereign,  and  the  rest  of  the  Council  now 
followed  suit.  On  March  13  Edward  VI  nominated  a  new  Council  of 
twenty-six.  It  consisted  of  the  sixteen  executors,  except  Somerset  and 
Southampton,  and  the  twelve  assistants  named  by  Henry  VIII ;  but 
they  now  held  office,  not  in  virtue  of  their  appointment  by  Henry's  will, 
but  of  their  commission  from  the  boy-King.  At  the  same  time  the 
Protector  received  a  fresh  commission.  He  was  no  longer  bound  to 
act  by  the  advice  of  his  colleagues ;  he  was  empowered  to  summon  such 
councillors  as  he  thought  convenient,  and  to  add  to  their  numbers  at 
will.  No  longer  the  first  among  equals,  he  became  King  in  everything 
but  name  and  prestige ;  and  the  attempt  of  Henrj^  VIII  to  regulate  the 
government  after  his  death  had,  like  that  of  every  King  before  him, 
completely  broken  down. 

Few  rulers  of  England  have  been  more  remarkable  than  the  Protector 
into  whose  hands  thus  passed  the  despotic  power  of  the  Tudors.  Many 
have  been  more  successful,  many  more  skilled  in  the  arts  of  government ; 
but  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  have  seen  further  into  the  future,  or  have 
been  more  strongly  possessed  of  ideas  which  they  have  been  unable  to 
carry  out.  He  was  born  before  his  time,  a  seer  of  visions  and  a 
dreamer  of  dreams.  He  dreamt  of  the  union  of  England  and  Scotland, 
each  retaining  its  local  autonomy,  as  one  empire  of  Great  Britain, 
"  having  the  sea  for  a  wall,  mutual  love  for  a  defence,  and  no  need  in 
peace  to  be  ashamed  or  in  war  to  be  afraid  of  any  worldly  power." 
Running  himself  the  universal  race  for  wealth,  he  yet  held  it  to  be  his 
special  office  and  duty  to  hear  poor  men's  complaints,  to  redress  their 
wrongs,  and  to  relieve  their  oppression.  He  strove  to  stay  the  economic 
revolution  wdiich  was  accumulating  vast  estates  in  the  hands  of  the  few, 
and  turning  the  many  into  landless  labourers  or  homeless  vagrants  ;  but 
his  only  success  was  an  Act  of  Parliament  whereby  he  gave  his  tenants 
legal  security  against  eviction  by  himself.  Bred  in  an  arbitrary  Court 
and  entrusted  with  despotic  power,  he  cast  aside  the  weapons  wherewith 
the  Tudors  worked  their  will  and  sought  to  govern  on  a  basis  of  civil 
liberty  and  religious  toleration.  He  abstained  from  interference  in  elec- 
tions to  Parliament  or  in  its  freedom  of  debate,  and  from  all  attempts  to 
pack  or  intimidate  juries.     He  believed  that  the  strength  of  a  King 


1547]  Destruction  of  Henry  VHP s  absolutism  477 

lay  not  in  the  severity  of  his  laws  or  the  rigour  of  his  penalties,  but  in 
the  affections  of  his  people  ;  and  not  one  instance  of  death  or  torture  for 
religion  stains  the  brief  and  troubled  annals  of  his  rule. 

The  absolutism,  which  came  in  with  the  new  monarchy  and  was 
perfected  by  Cromwell,  was  relaxed ;  and  the  first  Parliament  summoned 
by  the  Protector  (November  4,  1547)  effected  a  complete  revolution 
in  the  spirit  of  the  laws.  Nearly  all  the  treasons  created  since  1352 
were  swept  away,  and  many  of  the  felonies.  It  was,  indeed,  still  treason 
to  deny  the  Royal  Supremacy  by  writing,  printing,  overt  deed  or  act;  but 
it  was  no  longer  treason  to  do  so  by  "  open  preaching,  express  words  or 
sayings."  Benefit  of  clergy  and  right  of  sanctuary  were  restored ;  wives 
of  attainted  persons  were  permitted  to  recover  their  dower ;  accusations 
of  treason  were  to  be  preferred  within  thirty  days  of  the  offence ; 
no  one  was  to  be  condemned  unless  he  confessed  or  was  accused  by  two 
sufficient  and  lawful  witnesses;  and  Proclamations  were  no  longer  to  have 
the  force  of  law.  The  heresy  laws,  the  Act  of  Six  Articles,  all  the 
prohibitions  against  printing  the  Scriptures  in  English,  against  reading, 
preaching,  teaching,  or  expounding  the  Scriptures,  "  and  all  and  every 
other  act  or  acts  of  Parliament  concerning  doctrine  or  matters  of 
religion  "  were  erased  from  the  Statute-book. 

The  main  result  of  this  new-found  liberty  was  to  give  fresh  impetus 
to  the  Reformation  in  England.  The  Act  of  Six  Articles,  with  all  its 
ferocious  penalties,  had  failed  to  cure  diversities  of  opinion ;  and  the 
controversies  of  which  Henry  complained  to  his  Parliament  in  1545  now 
broke  out  with  redoubled  fury.  Among  a  people  unused  to  freedom 
and  inflamed  by  religious  passions,  liberty  naturally  degenerated  into 
licence.  The  tongues  of  the  divines  were  loosed ;  and  they  filled  the 
land  with  a  Babel  of  voices.  Each  did  what  was  right  in  his  own  eyes, 
and  every  parish  church  became  the  scene  of  religious  experiment. 
Exiles  from  abroad  flocked  to  partake  in  the  work  and  to  propagate 
the  doctrines  they  had  imbibed  at  their  respective  Meccas.  Some  came 
from  Lutheran  cities  in  Germany,  some  from  Geneva,  and  some  from 
Zwinglian  Zurich.  In  their  path  followed  a  host  of  foreign  divines, 
some  invited  by  Cranmer  to  form  a  sort  of  ecumenical  council  for  the 
purification  of  the  Anglican  Church,  some  fleeing  from  the  wrath  of 
Charles  V  or  from  the  perils  of  civil  war.  From  Strassburg  came  in 
1547  Pietro  Martire  Vermigli,  better  known  as  Peter  Martyr,  a  native  of 
Florence  and  an  ex-Augustinian,  and  Emmanuel  Tremellius  the  Hebraist, 
a  Jew  of  Ferrara ;  and  from  Augsburg  came  Bernardino  Ochino,  a  native 
of  Siena,  once  a  Franciscan  and  then  a  Capuchin.  In  1548  John  a  Lasco 
(Laski),  a  Polish  noble,  and  his  disciple,  Charles  Utenhove,  a  native  of 
Ghent,  followed  from  Emden ;  and  in  1549  Martin  Bucer  and  Paul 
Fagius  fled  hither  from  Strassburg.  Jean  Veron,  a  Frenchman  from 
Sens,  had  been  in  England  eleven  years,  but  celebrated  the  era  of  liberty 
by  publishing  in  1547  a  violent  attack  on  the  Mass.     Most  of  these 


478  Spirit  of  the  English  Reformation  [i547 

were  Zwinglians ;  and  even  among  the  Lutherans  many  soon  inclined 
towards  the  doctrine  of  the  Swiss  Reformers.  Of  the  humbler  immigrants 
who  came  to  teach  or  to  trade,  not  a  few  were  Anabaptists,  Socinians,  and 
heretics  of  every  hue  ;  and  England  became,  in  the  words  of  one  horrified 
politician,  the  harbour  for  all  infidelity. 

The  clamour  raised  by  the  advent  of  this  foreign  legion  has  somewhat 
obscured  the  comparative  insignificance  of  its  influence  on  the  develop- 
ment of  the  English  Church.  The  continental  Reformers  came  too  late 
to  affect  the  moderate  changes  introduced  during  Somerset's  protectorate, 
and  even  the  Second  Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI  owed  less  to  their 
persuasions  than  has  often  been  supposed.  England  never  became 
Lutheran,  Zwinglian,  or  Calvinistic ;  and  she  would  have  resented  dicta- 
tion from  Wittenberg,  Zurich,  or  Geneva  as  keenly  as  she  did  from 
Rome,  had  the  authority  of  Luther,  Zwingii,  or  Calvin  ever  attained  the 
proportions  of  that  of  the  Roman  Pontiff.  Each  indeed  had  his  adherents 
in  England,  but  their  influence  was  never  more  than  sectional,  and  failed 
to  turn  the  course  of  the  English  Reformation  into  any  foreign  channel. 

In  so  far  as  the  English  Reformers  sought  spiritual  inspiration  from 
other  than  primitive  sources,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that,  difficult  as  it 
would  be  to  adduce  documentary  evidence  for  the  statement,  they,  con- 
sciously or  unconsciously,  derived  this  inspiration  from  Wiclif.  Like 
them,  he  appealed  to  the  State  to  remedy  abuses  in  the  Church, 
attacked  ecclesiastical  endowments,  and  gradually  receded  from  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Mass.  The  Reformation  in  England  was 
divergent  in  origin,  method,  and  aim  from  all  the  phases  of  the 
movement  abroad ;  it  left  the  English  Church  without  a  counterpart  in 
Europe,  —  so  insular  in  character  that  no  subsequent  attempt  at  union 
with  any  foreign  Church  has  ever  come  within  measurable  distance  of 
success.  It  was  in  its  main  aspect  practical  and  not  doctrinal ;  it 
concerned  itself  less  with  dogma  than  with  conduct,  and  its  favourite 
author  was  Erasmus,  not  because  he  preached  any  distinctive  theology, 
but  because  he  lashed  the  evil  practices  of  the  Church.  Englishmen  are 
little  subject  to  the  bondage  of  logic  or  abstract  ideas,  and  they  began 
their  Reformation,  not  with  the  enunciation  of  any  new  truth,  but  with 
an  attack  upon  the  clerical  exaction  of  excessive  probate  dues.  No 
dogma  played  in  England  the  part  that  Predestination  or  Justification 
by  Eaith  played  in  Europe.  There  arose  a  master  of  prophetic  invective 
in  Latimer  and  a  master  of  liturgies  in  Cranmer,  but  no  one  meet  to 
be  compared  with  the  great  religious  thinkers  of  the  world.  Hence  the 
influence  of  English  Reformers  on  foreign  Churches  was  even  less  than 
that  of  foreign  divines  in  England.  Anglicans  never  sought  to  prosely- 
tise other  Christian  Churches,  nor  England  to  wage  other  than  defensive 
wars  of  religion  ;  in  Ireland  and  Scotland,  which  appear  to  afford  excep- 
tions, the  religious  motive  was  always  subordinate  to  a  political  end. 

The  Reformation  in  England  was  mainly  a  domestic  affair,  a  national 


1547]  Its  character  under  Edwai'd  VI  479 

protest  against  national  grievances  rather  than  part  of  a  cosmopolitan 
movement  towards  doctrinal  change.  It  originated  in  political  exigencies, 
local  and  not  universal  in  import ;  and  was  the  work  of  Kings  and  states- 
men, whose  minds  were  absorbed  in  national  problems,  rather  than  of 
divines  whose  faces  were  set  towards  the  purification  of  the  universal 
Church.  It  was  an  ecclesiastical  counterpart  of  the  growth  of  nation- 
alities at  the  expense  of  the  medieval  ideal  of  the  unit}'  of  the  civilised 
world.  Its  effect  was  to  make  the  Church  in  England  the  Church  of 
England,  a  national  Church,  recognising  as  its  head  the  English  King, 
using  in  its  services  the  English  tongue,  limited  in  its  jurisdiction  to 
the  English  Courts,  and  fenced  about  with  a  uniformity  imposed  by 
the  English  legislature.  This  nationalisation  of  the  Church  had  one 
other  effect :  it  brought  to  a  sudden  end  the  medieval  struggle  between 
Church  and  State.  The  Church  had  only  been  enabled  to  wage  that 
conflict  on  equal  terms  by  the  support  it  received  as  an  integral  part  of 
the  visible  Church  on  earth  ;  and  when  that  support  was  withdrawn  it 
sank  at  once  into  a  position  of  dependence  upon  the  State.  From  the 
time  of  the  submission  of  the  clergy  to  Henry  VIII  there  has  been  no 
instance  of  the  English  Church  successfully  challenging  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  State. 

It  was  mainly  on  these  lines,  laid  down  by  Henry  VIII,  that  the 
Reformation  continued  under  Edward  VI.  The  papal  jurisdiction  was 
no  more  ;  the  use  of  English  had  been  partially  introduced  into  the 
services  of  the  Church  ;  the  Scriptures  had  been  translated  ;  steps  had 
been  taken  in  the  direction  of  uniformity,  doctrinal  and  liturgical ;  and 
something  had  been  done  to  remove  medieval  accretions,  such  as  the 
worship  of  images,  and  to  restore  religion  to  what  Reformers  considered 
its  primitive  purity.  That  Henry  intended  his  so-called  "  settlement  " 
to  be  final  is  an  assumption  at  variance  with  some  of  the  evidence  ;  for 
he  had  entrusted  his  son's  education  exclusively  to  men  of  the  New 
Learning,  he  had  given  the  same  party  an  overwhelming  preponderance 
in  the  Council  of  Regency,  and  according  to  Cranmer  he  was  bent  in  the 
last  few  months  of  his  life  upon  a  scheme  for  pulling  down  roods  sup- 
pressing the  ringing  of  bells  and  turning  the  Mass  into  a  Communion. 
Cranmer  himself  had  for  some  years  been  engaged  upon  a  reform  of  the 
Church  services  which  developed  into  the  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
and  the  real  break  in  religious  policy  came,  not  at  the  accession  of 
Edward  VI,  but  after  the  fall  of  Somerset  and  the  expulsion  of  the 
Catholics  from  the  Council.  The  statute  procured  by  Henry  VIII  from 
Parliament,  which  enabled  his  son,  on  coming  of  age,  to  annul  all  Acts 
passed  during  his  minority,  was  probably  due  to  an  overweening  sense 
of  the  importance  of  the  kingly  office ;  but,  although  it  was  repealed 
in  Edward's  first  year,  it  inevitably  strengthened  the  natural  doubts 
of  the  competence  of  the  Council  to  exercise  an  ecclesiastical  supremacy 
vested  in  tlie  King.    No  government,  however,  could  afford  to  countenance 


480  The  Protector^ s  conservatism  [1547 

such  a  suicidal  theory  ;  and  the  Council  had  constitutional  right  on  its 
side  when  it  insisted  that  the  authority  of  the  King,  whether  in 
ecclesiastical  or  civil  matters,  was  the  same  whatever  his  age  might  be, 
and  refused  to  consider  the  minority  as  a  bar  to  further  prosecution  of 
the  Reformation. 

No  doubt,  they  were  led  in  the  same  direction,  some  by  conviction 
and  some  by  the  desire,  as  Sir  William  Petre  expressed  it,  "  to  fish  again 
in  the  teniiDestuous  seas  of  this  world  for  gain  and  wicked  mammon." 
But  there  was  also  popular  pressure  beliind  them.  Zeal  and  energy,  if 
not  numbers,  were  on  the  side  of  religious  change,  and  the  Council  found 
it  necessary  to  restrain  rather  than  stimulate  the  ardour  of  the  Reformers. 
One  of  its  first  acts  was  to  bind  over  the  wardens  and  curate  of 
St  Martin's,  Ironmonger  Lane,  to  restore  images  which  they  had  "  con- 
trary to  the  King's  doctrine  and  order  "  removed  from  their  church. 
Six  months  later  the  Council  was  only  pre  vented  from  directing  a  general 
replacement  of  images  illegally  destroyed  by  a  fear  of  the  controversy 
such  a  step  would  arouse ;  and  it  had  no  hesitation  in  punishing  the 
destroyers.  In  November,  1547,  it  sought  by  Proclamation  to  stay  the 
rough  treatment  which  priests  suffered  at  the  hands  of  London  serving- 
men  and  apprentices,  and  sent  round  commissioners  to  take  an  inventory 
of  church  goods  in  order  to  prevent  the  extensive  embezzlement  prac- 
tised by  local  magnates.  Early  in  the  following  year  Proclamations 
were  issued  denouncing  unauthorised  innovations,  silencing  preachers 
who  urged  them,  and  prohibiting  flesh-eating  in  Lent.  In  April,  1548, 
the  ecclesiastical  authorities  were  straitly  charged  to  take  legal  proceed- 
ings against  those  who,  encouraged  by  the  lax  views  prevalent  on  mar- 
riage, were  guilty  of  such  "  insolent  and  unlawful  acts  "as  putting  away 
one  wife  and  marrying  another.  The  Marquis  of  Northampton  was  him- 
self summoned  before  the  Council  and  summarily  ordered  to  separate 
from  the  lady  he  called  his  second  wife.  Similarly  the  first  Statute  of 
the  reign  was  directed  not  against  the  Catholics,  but  against  reckless 
Reformers  ;  it  sought  to  restrain  all  who  impugned  or  spoke  unrever- 
ently  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  altar ;  the  right  of  the  clergy  to  tithe 
was  reaffirmed,  and  the  Canon  Law  as  to  precontracts  and  sanctuary,  abol- 
ished by  Henry  VIII,  was  restored.  It  was  no  wonder  that  the  clergy 
thought  the  moment  opportune  for  the  recovery  of  their  position  as 
an  Estate  of  the  realm,  and  petitioned  that  ecclesiastical  laws  should 
be  submitted  to  their  approval,  or  that  they  should  be  readmitted 
to  their  lost  representation  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

These  measures  illustrate  alike  the  practical  conservatism  of  Somerset's 
government  and  the  impracticability  of  the  theoretical  toleration  to  which 
he  inclined.  His  dislike  of  coercion  occasionally  got  the  better  of  his 
regard  for  his  own  proclamations,  as  when  he  released  Thomas  Hancock 
from  his  sureties  taken  for  unlicensed  preaching.  But  he  soon  realised 
that  the  government  could  not  abdicate  its  ecclesiastical  functions,  least 


1547]  Tlie  attitude  of  Cranmer  and  the  ChurcJi  481 

of  all  in  the  early  days  of  the  Royal  Supremacy,  when  the  Bishops  and 
Cranmer  especially  looked  to  the  State  for  guidance.  Personally  he 
leaned  to  the  New  Learning,  and,  like  most  Englishmen,  he  was  Erastian 
in  his  view  of  the  relations  between  Church  and  State  and  somewhat 
prejudiced  against  sacerdotalism.  Yet,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  after 
his  death  he  was  regarded  as  a  martyr  by  the  French  Reformed  Church, 
he  cannot  any  more  than  the  English  Reformation  be  labelled  Lutheran, 
Zwinglian,  or  Calvinist  ;  and,  when  he  found  it  incumbent  upon  him  to 
take  some  line  in  ecclesiastical  politics,  he  chose  one  of  comparative 
moderation  and  probably  the  line  of  least  resistance.  The  Royal 
Supremacy  was  perhaps  somewhat  nakedly  asserted  when,  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  reign,  Bishops  renewed  their  commissions  to  exercise 
spiritual  jurisdiction,  and  when  in  the  first  session  of  Parliament  the 
form  of  episcopal  election  was  exchanged  for  direct  nomination  by 
royal  letters  patent.  But  the  former  practice  had  been  enforced,  and  the 
latter  suggested,  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII,  and  Somerset  secured  a 
great  deal  more  episcopal  co-operation  than  did  either  Northumberland  or 
Elizabeth.  Convocation  demanded,  unanimously  in  one  case  and  by  a 
large  majority  in  the  other,  the  administration  of  the  Sacrament  in 
both  kinds  and  liberty  for  the  clergy  to  marry  ;  and  a  majority  of  the 
Bishops  in  the  House  of  Lords  voted  for  all  the  ecclesiastical  bills  passed 
during  his  protectorate.  Only  Gardiner  and  Bonner  oifered  any  resist- 
ance to  the  Visitation  of  15-47  ;  and  it  must  be  concluded,  either  that 
Somerset's  religious  changes  accorded  with  the  preponderant  clerical 
opinion,  or  that  clerical  subservience  surpassed  the  compliance  of  laymen. 

The  responsibility  for  these  changes  cannot  be  apportioned  with  any 
exactness.  Probably  Gardiner  was  not  far  from  the  mark,  when  he  im- 
plied that  Cranmer  and  not  the  Protector  was  the  innovating  spirit  ;  and 
the  comparative  caution  with  which  the  Reformers  at  first  proceeded  was 
as  much  due  to  Somerset's  restraining  influence  as  the  violence  of  their 
later  course  was  to  the  simulated  zeal  of  Warwick.  Cranmer's  influence 
with  the  Council  was  greater  than  it  had  been  with  Henry  VIII  ;  to  him 
it  was  left  to  work  out  the  details  of  the  movement,  and  the  first  step 
taken  in  the  new  reign  was  the  Archbishop's  issue  of  the  Book  of  Homilies 
for  which  he  had  failed  to  obtain  the  sanction  of  King  and  Convocation 
five  years  before.  Their  main  features  were  a  comparative  neglect  of  the 
Sacraments  and  the  exclusion  of  charity  as  a  means  of  salvation.  Gardi- 
ner attacked  the  Book  on  these  grounds  ;  and,  possibly  out  of  deference 
to  his  protest,  the  saving  power  of  charity  was  affirmed  in  the  Council's 
injunctions  to  the  royal  visitors  a  few  months  later. 

The  Homilies  were  followed  by  Nicholas  Udall's  edition  of  the 
Paraphrase  of  Erasmus  that  had  been  prepared  under  Henry  VIII,  and 
was  now  intended,  partly  no  doubt  as  a  solvent  of  old  ideas,  but  partly 
as  a  corrective  of  the  extreme  Protestant  versions  of  Tyndall  and 
Coverdale,  which,  now  that  Henry's  prohibition  was  relaxed,  recovered 

c.  M.  H.  n.  31 


482  First  religious  reforms  [1547-9 

their  vogue.  The  substitution  of  English  for  Latin  in  the  services  of 
the  Church  was  gradually  carried  out  in  the  Chapel  Royal  as  an  example 
to  the  rest  of  the  kingdom.  Compline  was  sung  in  English  on  Easter 
Monday,  1547  ;  the  sermon  was  preached,  and  the  Te  Deum  sung,  in 
English  on  September  18  to  celebrate  Pinkie  ;  and  at  the  opening  of 
Parliament  on  November  4,  the  Gloria  in  JEJxeelsis,  the  Creed,  and 
the  Agnus  were  all  sung  in  English.  Simultaneously,  Sternhold,  a 
gentleman  of  the  Court,  was  composing  his  metrical  version  of  the 
Psalms  in  English,  which  was  designed  to  supplant  the  "  lewd  "  ballads 
of  the  people  and  in  fact  eventually  made  "  psalm-singing  "  a  character- 
istic of  advanced  ecclesiastical  Reformers. 

The  general  Visitation  in  the  summer  and  autumn  of  1547  was 
mainly  concerned  with  reforming  practical  abuses,  with  attempts  to 
compel  the  wider  use  of  English  in  services,  the  removal  of  images 
that  were  abused,  and  a  full  recognition  of  the  Supremacy  of  the 
boy-King.  In  November  and  December  Convocation  recommended  the 
administration  of  the  Sacrament  in  both  kinds,  and  liberty  for  priests 
to  marry  ;  but  the  latter  change  did  not  receive  parliamentary  sanction 
until  the  following  year.  The  bill  against  "  unreverent "  speaking  of  the 
Sacrament  was,  by  skilful  parliamentary  strategy  which  seems  to  have 
been  due  to  Somerset,  combined  with  one  for  its  administration  in  both 
kinds,  the  motive  being  obviously  to  induce  Catholics  to  vote  for  it  for 
the  sake  of  the  first  part,  and  Reformers  for  the  sake  of  the  second.  The 
Chantries  Bill  was  in  the  main  a  renewal  of  the  Act  of  1545  ;  but  its 
object  was  now  declared  to  be  the  endowment  of  education,  and  not  the 
defence  of  the  realm  ;  and  the  reason  alleged  for  suppression  was  the 
encouragement  that  chantries  gave  to  superstition  and  not  their  appro- 
priation by  private  persons.  Such  opposition  as  this  bill  encountered  was 
due  less  to  theological  objections  than  to  the  reluctance  of  corporations 
to  surrender  any  part  of  their  revenues  ;  and  Gardiner  subsequently 
expressed  his  concurrence  in  the  measure.  Its  effect  on  gilds  was  to 
convert  such  of  their  revenues  as  had  previously  been  devoted  to  obits 
and  masses  into  a  rent  paid  to  the  Crown  ;  but  a  bill,  which  was  in- 
troduced a  year  later  and  passed  the  House  of  Commons,  to  carry  out  the 
intentions  of  founding  schools  alleged  in  the  Chantries  Act,  disappeared 
after  its  first  reading  in  the  House  of  Lords  on  February  18,  1549. 

Immediately  after  the  prorogation  in  January,  1548,  questions  were 
addressed  to  the  Bishops  as  to  the  best  form  of  Communion  service  ;  the 
answers  varied,  some  being  in  favour  of  the  exclusive  use  of  English,  some 
of  the  exclusive  use  of  Latin.  The  form  actually  adopted  approaches 
most  nearly  to  Tunstall's  recommendation,  a  compromise  whereby  Latin 
was  retained  for  the  essential  part  of  the  Mass,  while  certain  prayers  in 
English  were  adopted.  This  new  Order  for  Communion  was  issued  in 
March,  1548,  a  Proclamation  ordering  its  use  after  Easter  was  prefixed, 
and  in  a  rubric  all  "  varying  of  any  rite  or  ceremony  in  the  Mass  "  was 


1547-9]  Desire  for  uniformity  of  worship  483 

foi'bidden.  A  more  decided  innovation  was  made  in  February,  when  b}^ 
Proclamation  the  Council  ordered  the  removal  of  all  images,  under  the 
impression  that  this  drastic  measure  would  cause  less  disturbance  than 
the  widespread  contentions  as  to  whether  the  images  were  abused  or  not. 
Ashes  and  palms  and  candles  on  Candlemas  Day  had  been  forbidden  in 
January  ;  and  soon  afterwards  a  Proclamation  was  issued  against  the 
practice  of  creeping  to  the  cross  on  Good  Friday  and  the  use  of  holy 
bread  and  holy  water.  These  prohibitions  had  been  contemplated  under 
Henry  VIII ;  they  met  with  guarded  approval  from  Gardiner  ;  and  they 
were  comparatively  slight  concessions  to  the  Reformers  in  a  Proclamation, 
the  main  purpose  of  which  was  to  check  unauthorised  innovations.  The 
Council  also  sought  to  remove  a  fruitful  cause  of  tumult  by  forbidding 
the  clergy  to  preach  outside  their  own  cures  without  a  special  licence. 
How  far  this  bore  hardly  on  the  Catholics  depends  upon  the  proportion 
of  Catholics  to  Reformers  among  the  beneficed  clerg}^ ;  but  it  is  fairly 
obvious  that  it  was  directed  against  the  two  extremes,  the  ejected  monks 
on  the  one  hand  and  the  itinerant  "  hot-gospellers  "  on  the  other. 

These  measures  were  temporary  expedients  designed  to  preserve  some 
sort  of  quiet,  pending  the  production  of  the  one  "  uniform  and  godly  " 
order  of  service  towards  which  the  Church  had  been  moving  ever  since 
the  break  with  Rome.  The  assertion  of  the  national  character  of  the 
English  Church  necessarily  involved  an  attempt  at  uniformity  in  its 
services.  The  legislation  of  1547  seemed  to  imply  unlimited  religious 
liberty,  and  to  leave  the  settlement  of  religious  controversy  to  public 
discussion ;  but  it  was  not  possible  to  carry  out  a  reformation  solely  by 
means  of  discussion.  Local  option,  too,  was  alien  to  the  centralising 
government  of  the  Tudors,  and,  unchecked,  might  well  have  precipitated 
a  Thirty  Years'  War  in  England.  Uniformity,  however,  was  not  the  end 
which  the  goA^ernment  had  in  view,  so  much  as  the  means  to  ensure  peace 
and  quietness.  Somerset  was  less  anxious  to  obliterate  the  liturgical 
variations  between  one  parish  and  another,  than  to  check  the  contention 
between  Catholics  and  Reformers  which  made  every  parish  the  scene  of 
disorder  and  strife ;  and  the  only  way  he  perceived  of  effecting  this 
object  was  to  draw  up  one  uniform  order,  a  compromise  and  a  standard 
which  all  might  be  persuaded  or  compelled  to  observe.  Nor  was  the 
idea  of  uniformity  a  novel  one.  There  were  various  Uses  in  medieval 
England,  those  of  York,  Hereford,  Lincoln,  and  Sarum ;  but  the 
divergence  between  these  forms  of  service  was  slight,  and  before  the 
Reformation  the  Sarum  Use  seems  to  have  prevailed  over  the  greater 
part  of  the  kingdom. 

As  regards  doctrine,  the  several  formularies  issued  by  Henry  VIII 
accustomed  men  to  the  idea  that  the  teaching  of  the  Church  of  England 
should  be  uniform  and  something  different  from  that  of  either  Catholic 
or  Reformed  Churches  on  the  Continent.  Nor  was  it  only  in  the  eyes  of 
antipapalists  that  some  reformation  of    Church  service  books  seemed 


484  The  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer  [1543-8 

necessary.  The  reformed  Breviary  of  Cardinal  Quignon,  dedicated  in 
1535  to  Paul  III,  anticipated  many  of  the  changes  which  Cranmer  made 
in  the  ancient  Use.  In  Catholic  as  well  as  in  Protestant  churches  the 
medieval  services  were  simplified  and  shortened,  partly  in  view  of  the 
busier  life  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  partly  to  allow  more  time  for 
preaching  and  reading  the  Scriptures. 

Thus  Cranmer  was  only  following  the  general  tendency  when,  in 
1543,  he  obtained  Henry's  consent  to  the  examination  and  reformation 
of  the  Church  service  books.  For  some  years  he  laboured  at  this  task  ; 
but  what  stage  he  had  reached  in  1547  when  Convocation  demanded  the 
production  of  his  work  is  not  clear.  That  demand  was  refused ;  and 
it  was  not  until  September,  1548,  that  the  final  stage  in  the  evolution 
of  the  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  commenced.  Its  development 
remains  shrouded  in  obscurity.  There  is  no  trace  of  any  formal  commis- 
sion to  execute  the  task,  of  the  composition  of  the  revising  body,  or  of 
the  place  where  it  carried  on  its  work.  Cranmer  without  doubt  took  the 
principal  part,  and  once  at  least  he  called  other  divines  to  help  him  at 
Windsor ;  but  it  is  unsafe  to  assume  that  the  revisers  continued  to  sit 
there,  or  indeed  that  there  was  any  definite  body  of  revisers  at  all. 
Probably  about  the  end  of  October  most  of  the  Bishops  were  invited  to 
subscribe  to  the  completed  book ;  but  it  seems  to  have  undergone  further 
alteration  without  their  consent,  and  there  is  not  sufficient  evidence  to 
show  that  it  was  submitted  to  Convocation.  In  December,  it  was  in  the 
House  of  Lords  the  subject  of  an  animated  debate  in  which  Cranmer, 
Ridley,  and  Sir  Thomas  Smith  defended,  and  Tunstall,  Bonner,  Thirlby, 
and  Heath  attacked,  the  way  in  which  it  treated  the  doctrine  of  the  Mass. 

Cranmer  himself  had  already  advanced  beyond  the  point  of  view 
adopted  in  the  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  In  the  autumn  of  1548 
BuUinger's  correspondents  liad  rejoiced  over  the  Archbishop's  abandon- 
ment of  Lutheran  views  ;  but  the  doctrine  assumed,  if  not  affirmed, 
in  the  new  Book  seemed  to  them  to  constitute  "  a  marvellous  recanta- 
tion." The  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer  bore,  indeed,  little  resem- 
blance to  the  service  books  of  the  Zwinglian  and  Calvinistic  Churches. 
Its  affinity  with  Lutheran  liturgies  was  more  marked,  because  the 
Anglican  and  Lutheran  revisers  made  the  ancient  Uses  of  the  Church 
their  groundwork,  while  the  other  Reformed  churches  sought  to  obliterate 
as  far  as  possible  all  traces  of  the  Mass.  It  is  the  most  conservative  of 
all  the  liturgies  of  the  Reformation  ;  its  authors  wished  to  build  upon, 
and  not  to  destroy,  the  past ;  and  the  materials  on  which  the}^  worked 
were  almost  exclusively  the  Sarum  Use  and  the  Breviary  of  Cardinal 
Quignon.  Whatever  intention  they  may  have  had  of  denying  the 
supplemental  character  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  was  studiously 
veiled  by  the  retention  of  Roman  terminology  in  a  somewhat  equivocal 
sense ;  room  was  to  be  made,  if  possible,  for  both  interpretations  ; 
the   sacrifice   might  be  regarded  as  real  and  absolute,  or  merely  as 


1549]  Religious  opposition  485 

commemorative  and  analogical.  The  "  abominable  canon  "  was  removed 
because  it  shut  the  door  on  all  but  the  Roman  doctrine  of  the  Mass,  and 
the  design  of  the  government  was  to  open  the  door  to  the  New  Learning 
without  definitely  closing  it  on  the  Old. 

The  intention  was  to  make  the  uniform  order  tolerable  to  as  many  as 
was  possible,  and  the  result  was  a  cautious  and  tentative  compromise,  a 
sort  of  Anglican  Interim,  which  was  more  successful  than  its  German 
counterpart.  The  penalties  attached  to  its  non-observance  by  the  First 
Act  of  Uniformity  were  milder  than  those  imposed  by  any  of  the  sub- 
sequent Acts,  and  they  were  limited  to  the  clergy.  Neither  in  the  First 
Act  of  Uniformity  nor  in  the  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  there  any 
attempt  to  impose  a  doctrinal  test  or  dogmatic  unity.  All  that  was 
enforced  was  a  uniformity  of  service;  and  even  here  considerable  latitude 
Avas  allowed  in  details  like  vestments  and  ritual.  A  few  months  later  a 
licensed  preacher  declared  at  St  Paul's,  that  faith  was  not  to  be  "coacted," 
but  that  every  man  might  believe  as  he  would.  Doctrinal  unity  was  in 
fact  incompatible  with  that  appeal  to  private  judgment  which  was  the 
essence  of  the  Reformation,  and  Somerset's  government  Avas  wise  in 
limiting  its  efforts  to  securing  an  outward  and  limited  uniformity. 

Even  this  was  sufficiently  difficult.  Eager  Reformers  began  at  once 
to  agitate  for  the  removal  of  those  parts  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
which  earned  Gardiner's  commendation,  while  Catholics  resented  its 
departure  from  the  standard  of  orthodoxy  set  up  by  the  Six  Articles. 
Religious  liberty  was  in  itself  distasteful  to  the  majority  ;  and  zealots  on 
either  side  were  less  angered  by  the  persecution  of  themselves  than  by 
the  toleration  of  their  enemies.  Dislike  of  the  new  service  book  was 
keenest  in  the  west,  where  the  men  of  Cornwall  spoke  no  English  and 
could  not  understand  an  English  service  book  ;  they  knew  little  Latin, 
but  they  were  accustomed  to  the  phrases  of  the  ancient  Use,  and  men 
tolerate  the  incomprehensible  more  easily  than  the  unfamiliar.  So  they 
rose  in  July,  1549,  and  demanded  the  restoration  of  the  old  service,  the 
old  ceremonies,  the  old  images,  and  the  ancient  monastic  endowments. 
They  asked  that  the  Sacrament  should  be  administered  to  laymen  in  one 
kind  and  only  at  Easter  —  a  strange  demand  in  the  mouths  of  those  who 
maintained  the  supreme  importance  of  the  sacramental  system  —  and 
that  all  who  refused  to  worship  it  should  suffer  death  as  heretics  ;  the 
Bibles  were  to  be  called  in  again,  and  Cardinal  Pole  was  to  be  made 
first  or  second  in  the  King's  Council. 

On  the  whole  the  Protector's  religious  policy  was  accompanied  by 
singularly  little  persecution  ;  and  the  instances  quoted  by  Roman 
Catholic  writers  date  almost  without  exception  from  the  period  after 
his  fall.  The  Princess  Mary  flatly  refused  to  obey  the  new  law  ;  and 
after  some  remonstrance  Somerset  granted  her  permission  to  hear  Mass 
privately  in  her  own  house.  Gardiner  was  more  of  an  opportunist  than 
Mary  ;  probably  he  thought  that  his  opposition  would  be  the  more  effec- 


486  Foreign  policy  [1547-9 

tive  for  being  less  indiscriminate.  But  it  was  no  less  deliberate,  and  in 
the  early  and  effective  days  of  the  Royal  Supremacy,  when  Bishops  were 
regarded  as  ecclesiastical  sheriffs,  their  resistance  to  authority  was  as 
little  tolerated  as  that  of  the  soldier  or  the  civil  servant  would  be  now. 
Gardiner  was  sent  to  the  Fleet,  but  he  was  treated  by  Somerset  with 
what  was  considered  excessive  lenience ;  and  in  January,  1548,  he  was, 
b}'^  the  King's  general  pardon,  released.  He  returned  to  his  diocese,  and 
preached  obedience  to  the  Council  on  the  ground  that  to  suffer  evil  was 
a  Christian's  duty.  The  reason  was  scarcely  pleasing  to  the  government, 
and  on  June  29  he  was  ordered  to  preach  a  sermon  at  Whitehall 
declaring  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  young  King  during 
his  minority  ;  at  the  same  time  he  was  forbidden  to  deal  with  the 
doctrines  that  were  in  dispute.  On  neither  point  did  he  give  satisfac- 
tion, and  on  the  following  day  he  was  sent  to  the  Tower.  Bonner  was 
sent  to  the  Marshalsea  for  a  similar  reason.  He  had  protested  against 
the  visitation  of  1547,  but  withdrew  his  protest,  and  after  a  few  weeks 
in  the  Fleet  remained  at  liberty  until  September,  1549.  He  was  then 
accused  of  not  enforcing  the  new  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  was 
ordered  to  uphold  the  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  King  in  a  sermon  at 
St  Paul's  ;  on  his  failure  to  do  so  he  was  imprisoned  and  deprived  by 
Cranmer  of  his  bishopric  ;  and  at  the  same  time  his  chaplain  Feckenham 
was  sent  to  the  Tower.  These,  however,  are  practically  the  only  instances 
of  religious  persecution  exercised  during  Somerset's  protectorate. 

This  comparative  moderation,  while  consonant  with  the  Protector's 
own  inclination,  was  also  rendered  advisable  by  the  critical  condition 
of  England's  relations  with  foreign  powers.  Any  violent  breach  with 
Catholicism,  any  bitter  persecution  of  its  adherents,  would  have  turned 
into  open  enmity  the  lukewarm  friendship  of  Charles  V,  precipitated 
that  hostile  coalition  of  Catholic  Europe  for  which  the  Pope  and  Cardinal 
Pole  were  intriguing,  and  rendered  impossible  the  union  with  Scotland 
on  which  the  Tudors  had  set  their  hearts.  For  this  reason  Somerset 
declined  (March,  1547)  the  proffered  alliance  of  the  German  Protestant 
Princes  ;  and,  to  strengthen  his  position,  he  began  negotiations  for 
a  treaty  with  France,  and  discussed  the  possibility  of  a  marriage  between 
the  Princess  Elizabeth  and  a  member  of  the  French  royal  family.  The 
treaty  was  on  the  point  of  ratification  when  the  death  of  Francis  I 
(March  31)  produced  a  revolution  in  French  policy.  The  new  King, 
Henry  II,  had,  when  Dauphin,  proclaimed  his  intention  of  demanding 
the  immediate  retrocession  of  Boulogne  ;  but  his  designs  were  not  con- 
fined to  the  expulsion  of  the  English  from  France.  He  also  dreamt  of 
a  union  with  Scotland.  Through  Diane  de  Poitiers  the  Guise  influence 
was  strong  at  Paris  ;  through  Mary  de  Guise,  the  Queen  Regent  of 
Scotland,  it  was  almost  as  powerful  at  Edinburgh ;  and  England  was 
menaced  with  a  pacte  de  famille  more  threatening  than  that  of  the 
Bourbons  two  centuries  later.     Even  Francis  had  considered  a  scheme 


1547-8]  The  attempted  Union  with  Scotland  487 

for  marrying  the  infant  Queen  of  Scots  to  a  French  Prince  ;  and,  while 
Henry  VIII  in  his  last  days  had  been  organising  a  new  invasion  of 
Scotland,  the  French  King  had  been  equally  busy  with  preparations  for 
the  defence  of  his  ancient  allies. 

Henry  II  of  France  changed  a  defensive  into  an  offensive  policy  ;  and, 
in  taking  up  the  Scottish  policy  urged  upon  him  by  Henry  VIII,  Somerset 
was  seeking,  not  merely  to  carry  out  one  of  the  most  cherished  of  Tudor 
aims,  but  to  ward  off  a  danger  which  now  presented  itself  in  more 
menacing  guise  than  ever  before.  There  might  be  doubts  as  to  the 
policy  of  pressing  the  union  with  Scotland  at  that  juncture  —  there  could 
be  none  as  to  the  overwhelming  and  immediate  necessity  of  preventing 
a  union  between  Scotland  and  France  ;  and  Gardiner's  advice,  to  let 
the  Scots  be  Scots  until  the  King  of  England  came  of  age,  would  have 
been  fatal  unless  he  could  guarantee  a  similar  abstinence  during  the 
same  period  on  the  part  of  Henry  II.  Somerset,  however,  pursued 
methods  different  from  those  of  Henry  VIII.  He  abandoned  alike  the 
feudal  claim  to  suzerainty  over  Scotland  and  the  claim  to  sovereignty 
which  Henry  had  asserted  in  1542  ;  he  refrained  from  offensive  refer- 
ences to  James  V  as  a  "  pretensed  king  "  ;  he  endeavoured  to  persuade 
the  Scots  that  union  was  as  much  the  interest  of  Scotland  as  of 
England  ;  and  all  he  required  was  the  fulfilment  of  the  treaty  which  the 
Scots  themselves  had  made  in  1543.  His  efforts  were  vain  ;  encouraged 
by  French  aid  in  men,  money,  and  ships,  the  Scottish  government  refused 
to  negotiate,  and  stirred  up  trouble  in  Ireland.  In  September,  1547,  the 
Protector  crossed  the  border,  and  on  the  10th  he  won  the  crushing- 
victory  of  Pinkie  Cleugh.  The  result  was  to  place  the  Lowlands  at 
England's  mercy  ;  and,  thinking  he  had  shown  the  futility  of  resistance, 
Somerset  attempted  to  complete  the  work  by  conciliation. 

During  the  winter  he  put  forward  some  remarkable  suggestions  for 
the  Union  between  England  and  Scotland.  He  proposed  to  abolish  the 
names  of  English  and  Scots  associated  with  centuries  of  strife,  and  to 
"  take  again  the  old  indifferent  name  of  Britons."  The  United  Kingdom 
was  to  be  known  as  the  Empire,  and  its  sovereign  as  the  Emperor  of 
Great  Britain.  There  was  to  be  no  forfeiture  of  lands  or  of  liberty, 
but  freedom  of  trade  and  of  marriage.  Scotland  was  to  retain  her  local 
autonomy,  and  the  children  of  her  Queen  were  to  rule  over  England. 
Never  in  the  history  of  the  two  realms  had  such  liberal  terms  been 
offered,  but  reason,  which  might  have  counselled  acceptance,  was  no 
match  for  pride,  prejudice,  and  vested  interests.  Care  was  taken  that 
these  proposals  should  not  reach  the  mass  of  the  Scottish  people.  Most 
of  the  nobility  were  in  receipt  of  French  pensions  ;  and  the  influence  of  the 
Church  was  energetically  thrown  into  the  scale  against  accommodation 
with  a  schismatic  enemy.  It  was  only  among  the  peasantry,  where 
Protestantism  had  made  some  way,  that  the  Union  with  England  was 
popular  ;    and  that  influence  was  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the 


488  The  Lord  High  Admwal  [1548-9 

presence  of  French  soldiery  in  the  streets  of  Edinburgh  and  in  most  of 
the  strongholds  of  Scotland.  The  seizure  of  Haddington  in  April,  1548, 
secured  for  a  year  the  English  control  of  the  Lowlands  :  but  it  did  not 
prevent  the  young  Queen's  transportation  to  France,  where  she  was  at 
once  betrothed  to  the  Dauphin,  This  step  provoked  Somerset  in  October 
to  revive  once  more  England's  feudal  claims  over  Scotland,  and  to  hint 
that  the  English  King  had  a  voice  in  the  marriage  of  his  vassal.  But 
the  Guises  could  afford  to  laugh  at  threats,  since  they  knew  that  the 
internal  condition  of  England  in  1549  prevented  the  threats  being 
backed  by  adequate  force  in  Scotland  or  in  France.  In  both  kingdoms 
they  became  more  aggressive ;  they  were  in  communication  with  rebels 
in  Ireland,  and  in  January,  1549,  a  French  emissary  was  sent  to  England 
to  see  if  Thomas  Seymour's  conspiracy  might  be  fanned  into  civil  war. 
Thomas  Seymour,  the  only  one  of  the  Protector's  brothers  who 
showed  any  aptitude  or  inclination  for  public  life,  had  served  with 
distinction  on  sea  and  land  under  Henry  VIII.  He  had  commanded 
a  fleet  in  the  Channel  in  1545,  had  been  made  master  of  the  Ordnance, 
and  had  wooed  Catharine  Parr  before  she  became  Henry's  sixth  wife. 
A  few  days  before  the  end  of  the  late  reign  he  was  sworn  of  the  Privy 
Council  ;  and  on  Edward's  accession  he  was  made  Baron  Seymour  and 
Lord  High  Admiral.  These  dignities  seemed  to  him  poor  compared 
with  his  brother's,  and  he  thought  he  ought  to  be  governor  of  the  King's 
person.  After  unsuccessful  attempts  to  secure  the  hands  of  the  Princess 
Mary,  the  Princess  Elizabeth,  and  Anne  of  Cleves,  he  married  Catharine 
Parr  without  consulting  his  colleagues  ;  and  before  her  death  he  renewed 
]iis  advances  to  the  Princess  Elizabeth.  He  refused  the  command  of  the 
fleet  during  the  Pinkie  campaign,  and  stayed  at  home  to  create  a  party 
for  himself  in  the  country.  He  suffered  pirates  to  prey  on  the  trade  of 
the  Channel,  and  himself  received  a  share  of  their  ill-gotten  goods  ;  he 
made  a  corrupt  bargain  with  Sir  William  Sharington,  wjio  provided  him 
with  money  by  tampering  with  the  Bristol  mint,  and  he  began  to  store 
arms  and  ammunition  in  various  strongholds  which  he  acquired  for  the 
purpose.  The  disclosure  of  Sharington's  frauds  (January,  1549)  brought 
Seymour's  plots  to  light.  After  many  examinations,  in  which  Warwick 
and  Southampton  took  a  leading  part,  a  bill  of  attainder  against  the 
Admiral  was  introduced  into  Parliament  ;  it  passed,  with  a  few  dissen- 
tients, in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  unanimously  in  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  on  March  20  Seymour  was  executed.  The  sentence  was  pro- 
bably just,  but  the  Protector  paid  dearly  for  his  weakness  in  allowing 
it  to  be  carried  out.  His  enemies,  such  as  Warwick  and  Southampton, 
who  seem  to  have  been  the  pri  me  movers  in  Seymour's  ruin,  perceived 
more  clearly  than  Somerset,  how  fatally  his  brother's  death  would  under- 
mine his  own  position  and  alienate  popular  favour  in  the  struggle  on 
which  he  had  now  embarked  in  the  cause  of  the  poor  against  the  great 
majority  of  the  Council  and  of  the  ruling  classes  in  England. 


The  agrarian  revolution  489 

This  struggle  was  fought  over  the  Protector's  attitude  towards  the 
momentous  social  revolution  of  the  sixteenth  century,  a  movement  which 
lay  at  the  root  of  most  of  the  internal  difficulties  of  Tudor  governments, 
and  vitally  affected  the  history  of  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  It  was  in 
effect  the  breaking  up  of  the  foundations  upon  which  society  had  been 
based  for  five  hundred  years,  the  substitution  of  competition  for  custom 
as  the  regulating  principle  of  the  relations  between  the  various  classes  of 
the  community. 

Social  organisation  in  medieval  times  was  essentially  conservative ; 
custom  was  the  characteristic  sanction  to  which  appeal  was  universally 
made.  Land,  in  the  eyes  of  its  military  feudal  lord,  was  valuable  less 
as  a  source  of  money  than  as  a  source  of  men  ;  it  was  not  rent  but 
service  that  he  required,  and  he  was  seldom  tempted  to  reduce  his 
service-roll  in  order  to  swell  his  revenues.  But  the  Black  Death  and 
the  Peasants'  Revolt,  co-operating  with  more  silent  and  gradual  causes, 
weakened  the  mutual  bonds  of  interest  between  landlord  and  tenant, 
while  the  extension  of  commerce  produced  a  wealthy  class  which  slowly 
gained  admission  into  governing  circles  and  established  itself  on  the 
land.  To  these  new  landlords  land  was  mainly  an  investment ;  they 
applied  to  it  the  principles  they  practised  in  trade  ;  and  sought  to 
extract  from  it  not  men  but  money.  They  soon  found  that  the  petite 
culture  of  feudal  times  was  not  the  most  profitable  use  to  which  land 
could  be  turned  ;  and  they  began  the  practice  known  as  "  engrossing,"  of 
which  complaint  was  made  as  early  as  1484  in  the  Lord  Chancellor's 
speech  to  Parliament.  Their  method  was  to  buy  up  several  holdings, 
which  they  did  not  lease  to  so  many  yeomen,  but  consolidated,  leaving 
the  old  homesteads  to  decay  ;  the  former  tenants  became  either  vaga- 
bonds or  landless  labourers,  who  boarded  with  their  masters  and  were 
precluded  by  their  position  from  marrying  and  raising  families.  Simi- 
larly the  new  landed  gentry  sought  to  turn  their  vague  and  disputed 
rights  over  common  lands  into  palpable  means  of  revenue.  Sometimes 
with  and  often  without  the  consent  of  the  commoners,  they  proceeded 
to  enclose  vast  stretches  of  land  with  a  view  to  converting  it  either  to 
tillage  or  to  pasture.  The  latter  proved  to  be  the  more  remunerative, 
owing  to  the  great  development  of  the  wool-market  in  the  Netherlands  ; 
and  it  was  calculated  that  the  lord,  who  converted  open  arable  land  into 
enclosed  pasture  land,  thereby  doubled  his  income. 

Yet  another  method  of  extracting  the  utmost  monetary  value  from 
the  land  was  the  raising  of  rents  ;  it  had  rarely  occurred  to  the  un- 
commercial feudal  lord  to  interfere  with  the  ancient  service  or  rent 
which  his  tenants  paid  for  their  lands,  but  respect  for  immemorial 
custom  counted  for  little  against  the  retired  trader's  habit  of  demanding 
the  highest  price  for  his  goods.  The  direct  result  of  these  tendencies 
was  to  pauperise  a  large  section  of  the  community,  though  the  aggregate 
wealth  of  the  whole  was  increased.     The  English  yeomen,  who  had 


490  The  Protector'' s  remedial  policy  [i5i7-48 

supplied  the  backbone  of  English  armies  and  the  great  majority  of 
students  at  English  Universities,  were  depressed  into  vagabonds  or  hired 
labourers.  As  indirect  results,  schools  and  universities  declined  ;  and 
foreign  mercenaries  took  the  place  of  English  soldiers ;  for  "  shepherds," 
wrote  a  contemporary,  "be  but  ill  archers." 

These  evils  had  not  passed  without  notice  from  statesmen  and  writers 
in  the  previous  reign.  Wolsey,  inspired  perhaps  by  Sir  Thomas  More, 
had  in  1517  made  a  vigorous  effort  to  check  enclosures  ;  and  More 
himself  had  sympathetically  pourtrayed  the  grievances  of  the  population 
in  the  pages  of  his  Utopia.  Later  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII  remedial 
measures  had  been  warmly  urged  by  conservatives  like  Thomas  Lupset 
and  Thomas  Starkey,  and  by  more  radical  thinkers  like  Brynkelow  and 
Robert  Crowley.  But  the  King  and  his  ministers  were  absorbed  in  the 
task  of  averting  foreign  complications  and  effecting  a  religious  revolution, 
while  courtiers  and  ordinary  members  of  Parliament  were  not  concerned 
to  check  a  movement  from  which  they  reaped  substantial  profit.  After 
the  accession  of  Edward  VI  the  constant  aggravation  of  the  evil  and  the 
S3^mpathy  it  was  known  to  evoke  in  high  quarters  brought  the  question 
more  prominently  forward.  The  Protector  himself  denounced  with 
more  warmth  than  prudence  the  misdeeds  of  new  lords  "  sj)rung  from 
the  dunghill."  Latimer  inveighed  against  them  in  eloquent  sermons 
preached  at  Court  ;  Scory  told  the  young  King  that  his  subjects  had 
become  "  more  like  the  slavery  and  peasantry  of  France  than  the  ancient 
and  godly  yeomanry  of  England."  Cranmer,  Lever,  and  other  reforming 
divines  held  similar  opinions,  but  the  most  earnest  and  active  member 
of  the  party,  which  came  to  be  known  as  the  "  Commonwealth's  men," 
was  John  Hales,  whose  Discourse  of  the  Common  Weal  is  one  of  the 
most  informing  documents  of  the  age. 

The  existence  of  this  party  alarmed  the  official  class,  but  the 
Protector  more  or  less  openly  adopted  its  social  programme  ;  and  it 
was  doubtless  with  his  connivance  that  various  remedial  measures  were 
introduced  into  Parliament  in  December,  1547.  One  bill  "  for  bringing 
up  poor  men's  children  "  was  apparently  based  on  a  suggestion  made  by 
Brynkelow  in  the  previous  reign  that  a  certain  number  of  the  poorest 
children  in  each  town  should  be  brought  up  at  the  expense  of  the 
community  ;  another  bill  sought  to  give  farmers  and  lessees  security  of 
tenure  ;  and  a  third  provided  against  the  decay  of  tillage  and  husbandry. 
None  of  these  bills  got  beyond  a  second  reading,  and  the  only  measure 
which  found  favour  with  Parliament  was  an  Act  which  provided  that  a 
weekly  collection  in  churches  should  be  made  for  the  impotent  poor,  and 
that  confirmed  vagabonds  might  be  sold  into  slavery. 

The  failure  of  Parliament  to  find  adequate  remedies  was  the 
signal  for  agrarian  disturbances  in  Hertfordshire  and  other  counties 
in  the  spring  of  1548  ;  and  the  Protector,  moved  thereto  by  divers 
supplications,  some  of  which  are  extant,  now  determined  to  take  action 


1548-9]  The  enclosure  commissions  491 

independently  of  Parliament.  On  the  first  of  June  he  issued  a  Procla- 
mation, in  which  he  referred  to  the  "  insatiable  greediness  "  of  those 
by  whose  means  "  houses  were  decayed,  parishes  diminished,  the  force 
of  the  realm  weakened,  and  Christian  people  eaten  up  and  devoured  of 
brute  beasts  and  driven  from  their  houses  by  sheep  and  bullocks." 
Commissioners  were  appointed  to  enquire  into  the  extent  of  enclosures 
made  since  1485  and  the  failure  of  previous  legislation  to  check  them, 
and  to  make  returns  of  those  who  broke  the  law. 

The  commissioners,  of  whom  Hales  was  the  chief,  encountered  an 
organised  and  stubborn  resistance  from  those  on  whose  conduct  they 
were  to  report.  With  a  view  to  disarming  opposition,  the  presentment 
of  offenders  was  postponed,  until  evidence  should  have  been  collected  to 
form  the  basis  of  measures  to  be  laid  before  Parliament  ;  and  subse- 
quently Hales  obtained  from  the  Protector  a  general  pardon  of  the 
offenders  presented  by  the  commission.  Both  measures  failed  to  mollify 
the  gentry,  who  resolutely  set  themselves  to  burke  the  enquiry.  They 
packed  the  juries  with  their  own  servants  ;  they  threatened  to  evict 
tenants  who  gave  evidence  against  them,  and  even  had  them  indicted  at 
the  assizes.  Other  means  taken  to  conceal  the  truth  were  the  ploughing 
up  of  one  furrow  in  a  holding  enclosed  to  pasture,  the  whole  being  then 
returned  as  arable  land,  and  the  placing  of  a  couple  of  oxen  with  a 
flock  of  sheep  and  passing  off  the  sheep-run  as  land  devoted  to  fatting 
beasts.  Under  these  circumstances  it  was  with  difficulty  that  the  com- 
missioners could  get  to  work  at  all  ;  and  only  those  commissions  on 
which  Hales  sat  appear  to  have  made  any  return.  The  opposition  was 
next  transferred  to  the  Houses  of  Parliament.  In  November,  1548, 
Hales  introduced  various  bills  for  maintaining  tillage  and  husbandry, 
for  restoring  tenements  which  had  been  suffered  to  decay,  and  for 
checking  the  growth  of  sheep-farms.  An  Act  was  passed  remitting  the 
payment  of  fee-farms  for  three  years  in  order  that  the  proceeds  might 
be  devoted  to  finding  work  for  the  unemployed  ;  and  a  tax  of  twopence 
was  imposed  on  every  sheep  kept  in  pasture.  But  the  more  important 
bills  were  received  with  open  hostility ;  and  after  acrimonious  debates 
they  were  all  rejected  either  by  the  Lords  or  by  the  Commons. 

This  result  is  not  surprising,  for  the  statute  of  1430  had  limited 
parliamentary  representation,  so  far  as  the  agricultural  districts  were 
concerned,  to  tlie  landed  gentry  ;  and  there  are  frequent  complaints  of 
the  time  that  the  representation  of  the  boroughs  had  also  fallen  mainly 
into  the  hands  of  capitalists,  who,  by  engrossing  household  property  and 
monopolising  trade,  were  providing  the  poorer  townsfolk  with  grievances 
similar  to  those  of  the  country  folk.  Nor  was  there  a  masterful  Tudor 
to  overawe  resistance.  The  government  was  divided,  for  Somerset's 
adoption  of  the  peasants'  cause  had  driven  the  majority  of  the  Council 
into  secret  opposition.  Warwick  seized  the  opportunity.  Hitherto 
there  had  been  no  apparent  differences  between  him  and  Somerset  ;  but 


492  Ket^s  rebellion. — French  aggression         [io4T-9 

now  his  park  was  ploughed  up  as  an  illegal  enclosure,  and  he  fiercely 
attacked  Hales  as  the  cause  of  the  agrarian  discontent.  Other  members 
of  the  government,  including  even  his  ally  Paget,  remonstrated  with  the 
Protector,  but  without  effect,  except  to  stift'en  his  back  and  confirm  him 
in  his  course.  Fresh  instructions  were  issued  to  the  commissioners  in 
1549  ;  and,  having  failed  to  obtain  relief  for  the  poor  by  legislation, 
Somerset  resorted  to  the  arbitrary  expedient  of  erecting  a  sort  of  Court 
of  Requests,  which  sat  in  his  own  house  under  Cecil's  presidency  to  hear 
any  complaint  that  poor  suitors  might  bring  against  their  oppressors. 

Measures  like  these  were  of  little  avail  to  avert  the  dangers  Somerset 
feared.  Parliament  had  scarcely  disposed  of  his  bills,  when  the  re- 
sentment of  the  peasants  found  vent  in  open  revolt.  The  flame  was 
kindled  first  in  Somersetshire  ;  thence  it  spread  eastwards  into  Wilts 
and  Gloucestershire,  southwards  into  Dorset  and  Hampshire  and  north- 
wards into  Berks  and  the  shires  of  Oxford  and  Buckingham.  Surrey 
remained  in  a  state  of  "  quavering  quiet "  ;  but  Kent  felt  the  general 
impulse.  Far  in  the  west  Cornwall  and  Devon  rose  ;  and  in  the  east 
the  men  of  Norfolk  captured  Norwich  and  established  a  "commonwealth  " 
on  Mousehold  Hill,  where  Robert  Ket,  albeit  himself  a  landlord  of 
ancient  family,  laid  down  the  law,  and  no  rich  man  did  what  he  liked 
with  his  own.  The  civil  war,  which  the  French  king  had  hoped  to 
evoke  from  Sejanour's  conspiracy,  seemed  to  have  come  at  last,  and 
with  it  the  opportunity  of  France.  On  August  8,  1549,  at  Whitehall 
Palace,  the  French  ambassador  made  a  formal  declaration  of  war. 

The  successful  Chauvinist  policy  of  the  French  government  would 
have  precipitated  a  conflict  long  before  but  for  the  efforts  of  the  English 
to  avoid  it.  Henry  II  had  begun  his  reign  by  breaking  off  the  nego- 
tiations for  an  alliance  with  England,  and  declining  to  ratify  the 
arrangement  which  the  English  and  French  commissioners  had  drawn 
up  for  the  delimitation  of  the  Boulonnais.  But  a  variety  of  circum- 
stances induced  him  to  modify  for  a  time  his  martial  ardour,  and  restrict 
his  hostility  to  a  policy  of  pin-pricks  administered  to  the  English  in 
their  French  possessions.  The  complete  defeat  of  the  German  Princes 
at  Mlihlberg  (April,  1547)  made  Henry  anxious  as  to  the  direction  in 
which  the  Emperor  would  turn  his  victorious  arms  ;  and  the  route  of 
the  Scots  at  Pinkie  five  months  later  inspired  a  wholesome  respect  for 
English  power.  Then,  in  1548,  Guienne  broke  out  in  revolt  against  the 
gahelle^  and  clamoured  for  the  privileges  it  had  once  enjoyed  under  its 
English  kings.  Charles  V,  moreover,  although  he  disliked  the  religious 
changes  in  England  and  declined  to  take  any  active  part  against  the 
Scots,  gave  the  French  to  understand  that  he  considered  the  Scots  his 
enemies.  Somerset,  meanwhile,  did  his  best  to  keep  on  friendly  terms 
with  Charles,  and  sought  to  mitigate  his  dislike  of  the  First  Act  of 
Uniformity  by  granting  the  Princess  Mary  a  dispensation  to  hear  mass 
in  private.    Unless  the  Emperor's  attention  was  absorbed  elsewhere, 


1549]  War  tvith  France. — Suppression  of  revolts  at  home  493 

a  French  attack  on  England  might  provoke  an  imperial  onslaught  on 
France. 

Still,  the  endless  bickerings  with  France  about  Boulogne  were  very 
exasperating  ;  and  eventually  the  Protector  offered  to  restore  it  at  once 
for  the  sum  stipulated  in  the  treaty  of  1546,  if  France  would  further 
the  marriage  between  Edward  VI  and  Mary,  Queen  of  Scots.  That, 
however,  was  the  last  thing  to  which  the  Guises  would  consent ;  the 
preservation  of  their  influence  in  Scotland  was  at  that  moment  the 
mainsj)ring  of  their  action  and  the  chief  cause  of  the  quarrel  with 
England.  The  only  condition  on  which  they  would  keep  the  peace  was 
the  abandonment  of  Scotland  to  their  designs,  and  that  condition  the 
Protector  refused  to  the  last  to  grant.  Before  the  end  of  June,  1549, 
the  French  had  assumed  so  threatening  an  attitude  that  Somerset  sent 
Paget  to  Charles  V  with  proposals  for  the  marriage  of  the  Princess 
Mary  with  the  Infante  John  of  Portugal,  for  the  delivery  of  Boulogne 
into  the  Emperor's  hands,  and  for  a  joint  invasion  of  France  by 
Imperial  and  English  armies.  This  embassy  seems  to  have  alarmed 
Henry  II,  and  he  at  once  appointed  commissioners  to  settle  the  disputes 
in  the  Boulonnais.  The  Protector  thereupon  forbade  Paget  to  proceed 
with  the  negotiations  for  a  joint  invasion.  The  Emperor  at  the  same 
time,  doubtful  of  the  value  of  England's  alliance  in  her  present  disturbed 
condition,  and  immersed  in  anxieties  of  his  own,  declined  to  undertake 
the  burden  of  Boulogne,  or  to  knit  any  closer  his  ties  with  England. 
This  refusal  encouraged  the  French  king  to  begin  hostilities.  He  had 
collected  an  army  on  the  borders  of  the  Boulonnais  ;  and  in  August 
it  crossed  the  frontier.  Ambleteuse  (Newhaven)  was  captured  through 
treachery ;  Blackness  was  taken  by  assault ;  Boulogneberg  was  dis- 
mantled and  abandoned  by  the  English  ;  and  the  French  forces  sat 
down  to  besiege  Boulogne. 

The  success  of  the  French  was  mainly  due  to  England's  domestic 
troubles.  Levies  which  had  been  raised  for  service  in  France  were 
diverted  to  Devon  or  Norfolk.  Fortunatel}-,  both  these  revolts  were 
crushed  before  the  war  with  France  had  lasted  a  fortnight.  The  rising 
in  the  west,  for  which  religion  had  furnished  a  pretext  and  enclosures 
the  material,  died  away  after  the  fight  at  the  Barns  of  Crediton,  and  the 
relief  of  Exeter  by  Russell  on  August  9.  The  eastern  rebels,  who  were 
stirred  solely  by  social  grievances,  caused  more  alarm ;  and  a  suspicion 
lest  the  Princess  Mary  should  be  at  their  back  gave  some  of  the  Council 
sleepless  nights.  The  Marquis  of  Northampton  was  driven  out  of 
Norwich,  and  the  restraint  and  orderliness  of  the  rebels'  proceedings 
secured  them  a  good  deal  of  sympathy  in  East  Anglia.  Warwick, 
however,  to  whom  the  command  was  now  entrusted,  was  a  soldier  of 
real  ability,  and  with  the  help  of  Italian  and  Spanish  mercenaries  he 
routed  the  insurgents  on  August  26  at  the  battle  of  Dussindale,  near 
Mousehold  Hill.     His  victory  made  Warwick  the  hero  of  the  gentlemen 


494  WaTwick''s  plot  against  the  Py^otector  [1549 

of  England.  He  had  always  opposed  the  Protector's  agrarian  schemes, 
and  he  was  now  in  a  position  to  profit  by  their  failure. 

The  revolts  had  placed  Somerset  in  a  predicament  from  which 
a  modern  minister  would  have  sought  refuge  in  resignation.  His 
sympath}'"  with  the  insurgents  weakened  his  action  against  them  ;  and 
his  readiness  to  pardon  and  reluctance  to  proscribe  exasperated  most  of 
his  colleagues.  He  was  still  obstinate  in  his  assertion  of  the  essential 
justice  of  the  rebels'  complaints,  and  was  believed  to  be  planning  for  the 
approaching  meeting  of  Parliament  more  radical  measures  of  redress 
than  had  yet  been  laid  before  it.  Paget  wrote  in  alarm  lest  far-reaching 
projects  should  be  rashly  adopted  which  required  ten  years'  deliberation  ; 
and  other  officials  made  Cecil  the  recipient  of  fearful  warnings  against 
the  designs  of  the  "  Commonwealth's  men."  The  Council  and  the 
governing  classes  generally  were  in  no  mood  for  measures  of  conciliation, 
and  disasters  abroad  and  disorders  at  home  afforded  a  good  pretext  for 
removing  the  man  to  whom  it  was  convenient  to  ascribe  them. 

The  malcontents  found  an  excellent  party-leader  in  Warwick  ;  few 
men  in  English  history  have  shown  a  greater  capacity  for  subtle  intrigue 
or  smaller  respect  for  principle.  A  brilliant  soldier,  a  skilful  diplomatist, 
and  an  accomplished  man  of  the  world,  he  was  described  at  the  time  as 
the  modern  Alcibiades.  No  one  could  better  turn  to  his  own  purposes 
the  passions  and  interests  of  others,  or  throw  away  his  tools  with  less 
compunction  when  they  had  served  his  end.  Masking  profound  ambi- 
tions under  the  guise  of  the  utmost  deference  to  his  colleagues,  he  never 
at  the  time  of  his  greatest  influence  attempted  to  claim  a  position 
of  formal  superiority.  Afterwards,  when  he  was  practically  ruler  of 
England,  he  sat  only  fourth  in  the  order  of  precedence  at  the  Council- 
board  ;  and  content  with  the  substance  of  power,  he  eschewed  such  titles 
as  Protector  of  the  Realm  or  Governor  of  the  King's  person. 

In  the  general  feeling  of  discontent  he  had  little  difficulty  in  uniting 
various  sections  in  an  attack  on  the  Protector.  The  public  at  large 
were  put  in  mind  of  Somerset's  ill-success  abroad ;  the  landed  gentry 
needed  no  reminder  of  his  attempts  to  check  their  enclosures .  Protestant 
zealots  recalled  his  slackness  in  dealing  with  Mass-priests,  and  Catholics 
hated  his  Prayer  Book,  Hopes  were  held  out  to  all ;  Gardiner  in  the 
Tower  expected  his  release ;  Bonner  appealed  against  his  deprivation  ; 
and  Southampton  made  sure  of  being  restored  to  the  woolsack.  Privy 
Councillors  had  private  griefs  as  well  as  public  grounds  to  allege ;  the 
Protector  had  usurped  his  position  in  defiance  of  Henry's  will  ;  he  had 
neglected  their  advice  and  browbeaten  them  when  they  remonstrated ; 
he  consulted  and  enriched  only  his  chosen  friends  ;  Somerset  House  was 
erected,  but  Warwick's  parks  were  ploughed  up. 

It  was  at  Warwick's  and  Southampton's  houses  in  Holborn  that  the 
plot  against  the  Protector  was  hatched  in  September,  1549  ;  and  the  im- 
mediate excuse  for  his  deposition  appears  to  have  been  the  abandonment. 


1549 


Somerset 's  fall  495 


after  a  brave  defence,  of  Haddington,  the  chief  English  stronghold 
in  Scotland  (September  14).  Somerset  had  left  Westminster  on  the 
12th  with  the  King  and  removed  to  Hampton  Court  ;  Cranmer,  Paget, 
St  John,  the  two  Secretaries  of  State,  Petre  and  Sir  Thomas  Smith, 
and  the  Protector's  own  Secretary,  Cecil,  remained  with  him  till  the 
beginning  of  October;  but  the  rest  of  the  Council  secretly  gathered  in 
London  and  collected  their  retainers.  The  aldermen  of  the  City  were 
on  their  side,  but  the  apprentices  and  poorer  classes  generally  adhered 
to  the  Protector.  One  of  Warwick's  methods  of  enlisting  the  support 
of  the  army  was  to  send  their  captains  to  Somerset  with  petitions 
for  higher  pay  than  he  knew  the  Protector  could  grant.  The  Duke 
apparently  suspected  nothing,  unless  suspicion  be  traced  in  the  "  matter 
of  importance  "  to  which  he  referred  in  his  letter  of  the  27th,  urging 
Russell  and  Herbert  to  hasten  their  return  from  the  west.  But  by  the 
3rd  or  4th  of  October  rumours  of  what  was  happening  reached  him. 
On  the  latter  day  that  "crafty  fox  Shebna,"  as  Knox  called  St  John, 
deserted  to  his  colleagues  in  London,  and  secured  the  Tower  by  dis- 
placing Somerset's  friends.  On  the  6th  Somerset  sent  Petre  to  demand 
an  explanation  of  the  Council's  conduct ;  but  Petre  did  not  return. 

The  Protector  now  thought  of  raising  the  masses  against  the  classes. 
Handbills  were  distributed  inciting  the  commons  to  rise  in  his  defence; 
extortioners  and  "great  masters  "  were  conspiring,  they  were  told,  against 
the  Protector  because  he  had  procured  the  peasants  their  pardon.  On 
the  night  of  the  6th  he  hurried  the  King  to  Windsor  for  the  sake  of 
greater  security.  But  either  he  repented  of  his  efforts  to  stir  a  social 
war,  or  he  saw  that  they  would  be  futile  ;  for  in  a  letter  to  the  Council 
on  the  7th  he  offered  to  submit  upon  reasonable  conditions  drawn  up  by 
representatives  of  both  parties.  The  Council  in  London  delayed  their 
answer  until  they  had  heard  from  Russell  and  Herbert,  to  whom  both 
parties  had  appealed  for  help.  The  commanders  of  the  western  army 
were  at  Wilton,  and  their  action  would  decide  the  issue  of  peace  or  war. 
They  promptly  strengthened  their  forces,  and  moved  up  to  Andover. 
There  they  found  the  country  in  a  general  uproar  ;  five  or  six  thousand 
men  from  the  neighbouring  counties  were  preparing  to  march  to  Somer- 
set's aid.  But  Russell  and  Herbert  were  disgusted  with  the  Pro- 
tector's inflammatory  appeals  to  the  turbulent  commons ;  they  threw 
the  whole  weight  of  their  influence  on  the  Council's  side,  and  succeeded 
in  quieting  the  commotion,  reporting  their  measures  to  both  the  rival 
factions. 

On  receipt  of  this  intelligence  the  Lords  in  London  brushed  aside 
the  conciliatory  pleas  of  the  King,  Cranmer,  Paget,  and  Smith,  and  took 
steps  to  effect  the  Protector's  arrest.  They  were  aided  by  treacherous 
advice  from  Paget,  who  purchased  his  own  immunity  at  the  expense  of  his 
colleagues.  In  accordance  probably  with  Paget's  suggestions.  Sir  Philip 
Hoby  was  sent  to  Windsor  on  the  10th  with  solemn  promises  from  the 


496  Reaction  [1549 

Council  that  the  Duke  should  suffer  no  loss  in  lands,  goods,  or  honours, 
and  that  his  adherents  should  not  be  deprived  of  their  offices.  On  the 
delivery  of  this  message  Paget  fell  on  his  knees  before  the  Protector,  and, 
with  tears  in  his  eyes,  besought  him  to  avail  himself  of  the  Council's 
merciful  disposition.  The  others,  relieved  of  their  apprehensions,  wept 
for  joy  and  counselled  submission.  Somerset  then  gave  way ;  and,  through 
the  "diligent  travail  "  of  Cranmer  and  Paget,  his  servants  were  removed 
from  attendance  on  the  King's  person.  When  this  measure  had  been 
effected,  the  Council  no  longer  considered  itself  bound  to  observe  the 
promises  by  which  it  had  induced  the  Protector  and  his  adherents  to 
submit.  Wingfield,  St  Leger,  and  Williams  were  sent  with  an  armed 
force  to  arrest  them  all  except  Cranmer  and  Paget.  On  the  12th  the 
whole  Council  went  down  to  Windsor  to  complete  the  revolution. 
Somerset  was  conveyed  to  London,  paraded  as  a  prisoner  through  the 
streets,  and  shut  up  in  the  Tower  ;  Smith  was  deprived  of  the  secretary- 
ship, expelled  from  the  Council,  and  also  sent  to  the  Tower ;  and  a  like 
fate  befell  the  rest  of  those  who  had  remained  faithful  to  the  Protector. 
Of  the  victors,  Warwick  resumed  the  office  of  Lord  High  Admiral,  which 
had  been  vacant  since  Seymour's  attainder;  Dr  Nicholas  Wotton,  who 
was  also  Dean  of  Canterbury  and  of  York,  succeeded  Smith  as  Secretary; 
and  Paget  received  a  peerage  in  reward  for  his  services.  The  distri- 
bution of  the  more  important  offices  was  deferred  until  it  was  settled 
which  section  of  the  Protector's  opponents  was  to  have  the  upper  hand 
in  the  new  government.  For  the  present  it  was  advisable  to  meet 
Parliament  with  as  united  a  front  as  possible,  in  order  to  secure  its 
sanction  for  the  Protector's  deposition,  and  its  reversal  of  so  much  of 
his  policy  as  both  sections  agreed  in  detesting. 

On  the  broader  aspects  of  that  policy  there  was  not  much  difference 
of  opinion.  Most  people  of  influence  disti'usted  that  liberty  on  which 
Somerset  set  so  much  store.  Sir  John  Mason,  for  instance,  an  able  and 
educated  politician,  described  his  repeal  of  Henry  VKPs  laws  concerning 
verbal  treason  as  the  worst  act  done  in  that  generation ;  and  in  accordance 
with  this  view  a  bill  was  introduced  declaring  it  felony  to  preach  and 
hold  "  divers  "  opinions.  Differences  about  the  definition  of  the  offence 
apparently  caused  this  bill  to  fail  ;  but  measures  sufficiently  drastic  were 
passed  to  stifle  any  opposition  to  the  new  government.  Ministers  sought 
to  perpetuate  their  tenure  of  office  by  making  it  high  treason  for  anyone 
to  attempt  to  turn  them  out.  That  tremendous  penalty,  the  heaviest 
known  to  the  law,  had  hitherto  been  reserved  for  offences  against  the 
sacrosanct  persons  of  royalty  ;  it  was  now  employed  to  protect  those  who 
wielded  royal  authority.  It  became  high  treason  for  twelve  or  more 
persons  to  meet  with  the  object  of  killing  or  even  imprisoning  a  member 
of  the  Privy  Council  —  an  unparalleled  enactment  which,  had  it  been 
retrospective,  would  have  rendered  the  Privy  Council  itself  liable  to  a 
charge  of  treason  for  its  action  against  the  Protector.     The  same  clause 


1549]  Repressive  legislation  497 

imposed  the  same  penalty  upon  persons  assembling  for  the  purpose  of 
"altering  the  laws  "  ;  and  the  Act  also  omitted  the  safeguards  Somerset 
had  provided  against  the  abuse  of  such  treason  laws  as  he  had  left  on 
the  Statute-book  ;  it  contained  no  clause  limiting  the  time  within  which 
charges  of  treason  were  to  be  preferred  or  requiring  the  evidence  of 
two  witnesses. 

The  fact  that  this  Act  did  not  j)ass  until  it  had  been  read  six  times 
in  the  Commons  and  six  times  in  the  Lords  may  indicate  that  it 
encountered  considerable  opposition  ;  but  tliere  was  probably  little  hesi- 
tation in  reversing  the  Protector's  agrarian  policy.  Parliament  was  not 
indeed  content  with  that ;  it  met  (November  4,  1549)  in  a  spirit  of 
exasperation  and  revenge,  and  it  went  back,  not  only  upon  the  radical 
proposals  of  Somerset,  but  also  upon  the  whole  tenour  of  Tudor  land 
legislation.  Enclosures  had  been  forbidden  again  and  again  ;  they  were 
now  expressly  declared  to  be  legal  ;  and  Parliament  enacted  that  lords 
of  the  manor  might  "  approve  themselves  of  their  wastes,  woods,  and 
pastures  notwithstanding  the  gainsaying  and  contradiction  of  their 
tenants."  In  order  that  the  process  might  be  without  let  or  hindrance, 
it  was  made  treason  for  forty,  and  felony  for  twelve,  persons  to  meet  for 
the  purpose  of  breaking  down  any  enclosure  or  enforcing  any  right  of 
way ;  to  summon  such  an  assembly  or  incite  to  such  an  act  was  also 
felony  ;  and  any  copyholder  refusing  to  help  in  repressing  it  forfeited 
his  copyhold  for  life.  The  same  penalty  was  attached  to  hunting  in 
any  enclosure  and  to  assembling  with  the  object  of  abating  rents  or  the 
price  of  corn  ;  but  the  prohibition  against  capitalists  conspiring  to  raise 
prices  was  repealed,  and  so  were  the  taxes  which  Somerset  had  imposed 
on  sheep  and  woollen  cloths.  The  masses  had  risen  against  the  classes, 
and  the  classes  took  their  revenge. 

This,  however,  Avas  not  the  kind  of  reaction  most  desired  by  the 
Catholics  who,  led  by  Southampton,  had  assisted  Warwick  to  overthrow 
Somerset.  Southampton  was  moved  by  private  grudges,  but  he  also 
desired  a  return  to  Catholic  usages  or  at  least  a  pause  in  the  process  of 
change  ;  and  for  a  time  it  seemed  that  his  party  might  prevail.  "  Those 
cruel  beasts,  the  Romanists,"  wrote  one  evangelical  divine,  were  already 
beginning  to  triumph,  to  revive  the  Mass, and  to  threaten  faithful  servants 
of  Christ  with  the  fate  of  the  fallen  Duke.  They  were,  said  another, 
struggling  earnestly  for  their  kingdom,  and  even  Parliament  felt  it 
necessary  to  denounce  rumours  that  the  old  Latin  service  and  supersti- 
tious uses  would  be  restored.  Southampton  was  one  of  the  six  lords  to 
whose  charge  the  person  of  the  King  was  speciall}^  entrusted  ;  the  Earl 
of  Arundel  was  another,  and  Southwell  reappeared  at  the  Council- 
board.  Bonner  had  been  deprived  by  Cranmer  in  September  ;  but  no 
steps  were  taken  to  find  a  successor,  and  the  decision  might  yet  be 
reversed.  Gardiner  petitioned  for  release,  while  Hooper  thought  him- 
self in  the  greatest  peril. 

C.     M.     H.     II.  '^2 


498  Defeat  of  the  Catholic  pariij  [1549-50 

So  the  balance  trembled.  But  Southampton  was  no  match  for  "  that 
most  faithful  and  intrepid  soldier  of  Christ,"  as  Hooper  styled  Warwick. 
"England,"  he  went  on,  "cannot  do  without  him."  Neither  could  the 
Earl  afford  to  discard  such  zealous  adherents  as  the  Reformei's  ;  in  them 
he  found  his  main  support.  They  compared  him  with  Moses  and  Joshua, 
and  described  him  and  Dorset  as  "  the  two  most  shining  lights  of  the 
Church  of  England."  They  believed  that  Somerset  had  been  deposed  for 
his  slackness  in  the  cause  of  religious  persecution  ;  Warwick  resolved 
to  run  no  such  risk.  The  tendency  towards  religious  change,  which 
Henry  VIII  had  failed  to  stop,  was  still  strong,  and  Warwick  threw 
himself  into  the  stream.  Privately  he  seems,  if  he  believed  in  anything, 
to  have  favoured  Catholic  doctrines  ;  and  the  consciousness  of  his  insin- 
cerity made  him  all  the  louder  in  his  professions  of  Protestant  zeal,  and 
all  the  more  eager  to  push  to  extremes  the  principles  of  the  Reformers. 
He  became,  in  Hooper's  words,  "  a  most  holy  and  fearless  instrument  of 
the  Word  of  God." 

But  this  policy  could  not  be  combined  with  the  conciliation  of 
Catholics  ;  and  the  coalition  which  had  driven  Somerset  from  power  fell 
asunder,  as  soon  as  its  immediate  object  had  been  achieved,  and  it  was 
called  upon  to  formulate  a  policy  of  its  own.  Southampton  ceased  to 
attend  the  Council  after  October  ;  and  Parliament,  which  had  completely 
reversed  the  Protector's  liberal  and  social  programme,  effected  almost 
as  great  a  change  in  the  methods  and  aims  of  his  religious  policy.  The 
direction  may  have  been  the  same,  but  it  is  pure  assumption  to  suppose 
that  the  Protector  would  have  gone  so  far  as  his  successors  or  employed 
the  same  violence  to  attain  his  ends.  The  difference  in  c*liaracter  between 
the  two  administrators  was  vividly  illustrated  in  the  session  of  Parliament 
which  began  a  month  after  the  change.  Under  Somerset  there  had 
always  been  a  good  attendance  of  Bishops,  and  a  majority  of  them  had 
voted  for  all  his  religious  proposals  ;  at  the  opening  of  the  first  session 
after  his  fall  there  were  only  nine  Bishops,  and  a  majority  of  them  voted 
against  two  of  the  three  measures  of  ecclesiastical  importance  passed  dur- 
ing its  course.  One  was  the  Act  for  the  destruction  of  all  service  books 
other  than  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  Henry's  Primer  ;  and  the 
other  Avas  a  renewal  of  the  provision  for  the  reform  of  Canon  Law.  A 
majority  of  Bishops  voted  for  the  bill  appointing  a  commission  to  draw 
up  a  new  Ordinal ;  but,  when  they  complained  that  their  jurisdiction  was 
•despised  and  drafted  a  bill  for  its  restoration,  the  measure  was  rejected. 

The  prorogation  of  Parliament  (February,  1550)  was  followed  by  the 
final  overthrow  of  the  Catholic  party  and  the  complete  establishment  of 
Warwick's  control  over  the  government.  He  had  already  begun  to  pack 
the  Council,  which  had  remained  practically  unchanged  since  Henry's 
death,  by  adding  to  it  five  of  his  own  adherents.  Southampton  was  now 
expelled  from  the  Council,  Arundel  was  deprived  of  his  office  of  Lord 
Chamberlain,  and  Southwell  was  sent  to  the  Tower.     The  offices  vacated 


l55o]  Peace  at  any  j^rice  499 

by  the  Catholic  lords  and  Somerset's  party  were  distributed  among 
Warwick's  friends.  St  John  became  Earl  of  Wiltshire  and  Lord  High 
Treasurer  ;  Warwick  succeeded  him  as  Lord  Great  Master  of  the  House- 
hold and  President  of  the  Council ;  and  Northampton  succeeded  Warwick 
as  Great  Chamberlain  of  England.  Arundel's  office  of  Chamberlain  of 
the  Household  was  conferred  on  Wentworth,  and  Paget's  ComptroUership 
on  Wingfield  ;  Russell  was  created  Earl  of  Bedford,  and  Herbert  was 
made  President  of  the  Cotmcil  of  Wales. 

The  new  government  now  felt  firm  in  the  saddle,  and  it  proceeded  to 
turn  its  attention  to  foreign  affairs.  His  failure  abroad  had  been  the 
chief  ostensible  reason  for  Somerset's  downfall ;  but  his  successors  had  done 
nothing  to  redeem  their  implied  promise  of  amendment.  In  spite  of  the 
fact  that  the  agrarian  insurrections  —  the  immediate  cause  of  the  Pro- 
tector's reverses  in  France  and  Scotland — had  been  suppressed,  and  large 
bodies  of  troops  thus  set  free  for  service  elsewhere,  not  a  place  had  been 
recaptured  in  France,  and  in  Scotland  nearly  all  the  English  strongholds 
fell  during  the  winter  into  the  enemy's  hands.  The  Council  preferred 
peace  to  an  attempt  to  retrieve  their  fortunes  by  war  ;  and  early  in  1550 
Warwick  made  secret  overtures  to  Henry  II.  The  French  pushed  their 
advantage  to  the  uttermost  ;  and  the  peace  concluded  in  March  was  the 
most  ignominious  treaty  signed  by  England  during  the  century. 

Boulogne,  which  was  to  have  been  restored  four  years  later  for 
800,000  crowns,  was  surrendered  for  half  that  sum.  All  English 
strongholds  in  Scotland  were  to  be  given  up  without  compensation  ; 
England  bound  itself  to  make  no  war  on  that  country  unless  fresh 
grounds  of  offence  were  given,  and  condoned  the  marriage  of  Mary  to 
the  Dauphin  of  France.  The  net  result  was  the  abandonment  of  the 
whole  Tudor  policy  towards  Scotland,  the  destruction  of  English 
influence  across  the  Border,  and  the  establishment  of  French  control 
in  Edinburgh.  Henry  II  began  to  speak  of  himself  as  King  of 
Scotland  ;  it  was  as  much  subject  to  him,  he  said,  as  France  itself  ; 
and  he  boasted  that  by  this  peace  he  had  now  added  to  these  two  realms 
a  third,  namely  England,  of  whose  King,  subjects,  and  resources  he  had 
such  absolute  disposal  that  the  three  might  be  reckoned  as  one  kingdom 
of  which  he  was  King.  To  make  himself  yet  more  secure,  he  began  a 
policy  of  active,  though  secret,  intervention  in  Ireland.  Had  he 
succeeded  in  this,  he  would  really  have  held  England  in  the  hollow 
of  his  hand  ;  had  a  son  been  born  to  Mary  Stewart  and  Francis  II, 
England  might  even  have  become  a  French  province.  Fortunately, 
the  accession  of  Mary  Tudor  broke  tlie  French  ring  which  girt  England 
round  about  ;  but  it  was  certainly  no't  Warwick's  merit  that  England 
was  delivered  from  perhaps  the  most  pressing  foreign  danger  with  which 
she  was  ever  threatened. 

While,  however,  the  policy  which  Warwick  adopted  involved  a 
reversal   of   the   time-honoured   Burgundian   alliance   and  a  criminal 


500  Religious  controversy  [1550 

neglect  of  England's  ultimate  interests,  its  immediate  effects  were 
undeniably  advantageous  to  the  government.  It  was  at  once  relieved 
from  the  pressure  of  war  on  two  fronts,  and  an  intolerable  drain  on  the 
exchequer  was  stopped.  Security  from  foreign  interference  afforded  an 
excuse  for  reducing  expenditure  on  armaments  and  military  forces,  and 
even  for  seriously  impairing  the  effective  strength  of  tlie  navy,  the 
creation  of  which  had  been  Henry  VIIFs  least  questionable  achievement ; 
and  the  Council  was  left  free  to  pursue  its  religious  policy,  even  to  the 
persecution  of  the  Princess  Mary,  without  fear  of  interruption  from  her 
cousin  the  Emperor.  The  alliance  of  England,  Scotland,  and  France 
was  a  combination  which  Charles  could  not  afford  to  attack,  more 
particularl}^  when  the  league  between  Henry  II,  Maurice  of  Saxony, 
and  the  reviving  Protestant  Princes  in  Germany  gave  him  more  than 
enough  to  do  to  defend  himself.  France,  the  persecutor  of  heresy  at 
home,  lent  her  support  to  the  English  government  while  it  pursued 
its  campaign  against  Roman  doctrine,  just  as  she  had  countenanced 
Henry  VIII  while  he  was  uprooting  the  Roman  jurisdiction. 

The  path  of  the  government  was  thus  made  easy  abroad  ;  but  at  home 
it  was  crowded  with  difficulties.  The  diversity  of  religious  opinion, 
which  Henry  VIII's  severity  had  only  checked  and  Somerset's  lenience 
had  encouraged,  grew  ever  more  marked.  The  New  Learning  was,  in 
the  absence  of  effective  opposition,  carrying  all  before  it  in  the  large 
cities  ;  and  the  more  trenchantly  a  preacher  denounced  the  old  doctrines, 
the  greater  were  the  crowds  which  gathered  to  hear  him.  The  favourite 
divine  in  London  was  Hooper,  who  went  far  beyond  anything  which  the 
Council  had  yet  done  or  at  present  intended.  Between  twenty  and 
thirty  editions  of  the  Bible  had  appeared  since  the  beginning  of  the 
reign,  and  nearly  all  were  made  vehicles,  by  their  annotations,  of  attacks 
on  Catholic  dogma.  Altars,  images,  painted  glass  windov/s  became  the 
object  of  a  popular  violence  which  the  Council  was  unable,  even  if  it 
was  willing,  to  restrain ;  and  the  parochial  clergy  indulged  in  a  ritual 
lawlessness  which  the  Bishops  encouraged  or  checked  according  to 
their  own  individual  preferences.  That  the  majority  of  the  nation 
disliked  both  these  changes  and  their  method  may  perhaps  be  assumed, 
but  the  men  of  the  Old  Learning  made  little  stand  against  the  men  of 
the  New.  In  a  revolution  the  first  advantage  generally  lies  with  the 
aggressors.  The  Catholics  had  not  been  rallied,  nor  the  Counter- 
Reformation  organised,  and  their  natural  leaders  had  been  silenced 
for  their  opposition  to  the  government.  But  there  were  deeper  causes 
at  work  ;  the  Catholic  Church  had  latterly  denied  to  the  laity  any 
voice  in  the  determination  of  Catholic  doctrine  ;  but  now  the  laity  had 
been  called  in  to  decide.  Discussion  had  descended  from  Court  and 
from  senate  into  the  street,  where  only  one  of  the  parties  was  adequately 
equipped  for  the  contest.  Catholics  still  were  content  to  do  as  they  had 
been  taught  and  to  leave  the  matter  to  the  clergy  ;  they  were  ill  fitted 


1550-1]  Religious  persecution  501 

to  cope  with  antagonists  who  regarded  theology  as  a  matter  for  private 
judgment,  and  had  by  study  of  the  Scriptures  to  some  extent  prepared 
themselves  for  its  exercise.  The  authority  of  the  Church,  to  which 
Catholics  bowed,  had  suffered  many  rude  shocks ;  and  in  the  appeal  to 
the  Scriptures  they  were  no  match  for  the  zeal  and  conviction  of  their 
opponents. 

Under  the  circumstances  it  might  seem  that  the  Council  would  have 
done  well  to  resort  to  some  of  Henry  VIII's  methods  for  enforcing 
uniformity ;  and  indeed  both  parties  agreed  in  demanding  greater  rigour. 
But  they  could  not  agree  on  the  question  to  whom  the  rigour  should  be 
applied  ;  their  contentions  indirectly  tended  towards  the  emancipation 
of  conscience  from  the  control  of  authority,  though  such  a  solution  seemed 
shocking  alike  to  those  who  believed  in  the  Royal  and  to  those  who 
believed  in  the  Papal  Supremacy.  There  was  no  course  open  to  the 
government  that  would  have  satisfied  all  contemporary  or  modern  critics. 
England  was  in  the  throes  of  a  revolution  in  which  no  government  could 
have  maintained  perfect  order  or  avoided  all  persecution.  The  Council's 
policy  lacked  the  extreme  moderation  and  humanity  of  Somerset's  rule, 
but  it  averted  open  disruption,  and  did  so  at  the  cost  of  less  rigour  than 
characterised  the  rule  of  Henry  VIII,  of  Mary,  or  of  Elizabeth. 

At  one  end  of  the  religious  scale  Joan  Bocher,  whom  Somerset  had 
left  in  prison  after  her  condemnation  by  the  ecclesiastical  Courts  in  the 
hope  that  she  might  be  converted,  was  burnt  in  May,  1550 ;  and  a  year 
later  another  heretic,  George  van  Paris,  suffered  a  similar  fate.  Against 
Roman  Catholics  the  penalties  of  the  first  Act  of  Uniformity  now  began 
to  be  enforced ;  but  they  were  limited  to  clerical  offenders  and  of  these 
there  seem  to  have  been  comparatively  few.  Dr  Cole  was  expelled  from 
the  Wardenship  of  New  College,  and  Dr  Morwen,  President  of  Corpus 
Christi,  Oxford,  was  sent  for  a  time  to  the  Fleet ;  two  divines,  Crispin 
and  Moreman,  who  had  been  implicated  in  the  Cornish  rebellion,  were 
confined  in  the  Tower  ;  two  of  Gardiner's  chaplains^  Seton  and  Watson, 
are  said  to  have  been  subjected  to  some  restraint  ;  four  others,  John 
Boxall,  afterwards  Queen  Mary's  Secretary,  William  Rastell,  More's 
nephew,  Nicholas  Harpsfield  and  Dr  Richard  Smith,  whose  recantations 
were  as  numerous  as  his  apologies  for  the  Catholic  faith,  fled  to  Flanders  ; 
and  these,  with  Cardinal  Pole,  whose  attainder  was  not  reversed,  make 
up  the  list  of  those  who  are  said  by  Roman  martyrologists  to  have 
suffered  for  their  belief  in  tlie  reign  of  Edward  VI.  To  them,  however, 
must  be  added  five  or  six  Bishops,  who  were  deposed.  P>onner  was  the 
only  Bishop  deprived  in  1550,  but  in  the  following  year  Gardiner,  Heath 
of  Worcester,  Day  of  Chichester,  and  Voysey  of  Exeter  all  vacated  their 
sees,  and  Tunstall  of  Durham  was  sent  to  the  Tower.  Their  places  were 
filled  with  zealous  Reformers  ;  Coverdale  became  Bishop  of  Exeter, 
Ridley  succeeded  Bonner  at  London,  and  Ponet  took  Ridley's  see  ;  -Ponet 
was  soon  transferred  to  Gardiner's  seat  at  Winchester,  and  Scory  supplied 


502  Spoliation  of  Church  property  [1547-51 

the  place  left  vacant  by  Ponet,  but  was  almost  at  once  translated  to 
Day's  bishopric  at  Chichester.  Warwick  wished  to  enthrone  John  Knox 
at  Rochester  as  a  whetstone  to  Cranmer,  but  the  Scottish  Reformer 
proved  ungrateful;  and  Rochester,  which  had  seen  five  Bishops  in  as 
many  years,  remained  vacant  to  the  end  of  the  reign. 

The  most  remarkable  of  these  creations  and  translations,  which  were 
made  by  letters  patent,  was  perhaps  the  elevation  of  Hooper  to  the 
see  of  Gloucester.  Hooper  had,  after  a  course  of  Zwinglian  theology  at 
Zurich,  become  chaplain  to  the  Protector  on  the  eve  of  his  fall  ;  but  he 
found  a  more  powerful  friend  in  Warwick,  who  made  him  Lent  preacher 
at  Court  in  February,  1550.  He  was  one  of  those  zealous  and  guileless 
Reformers  in  whom  Warwick  found  his  choicest  instruments ;  he  combined 
fervent  denunciations  of  the  evils  of  the  times  with  extravagant  admira- 
tion for  the  man  in  whom  they  were  most  strikingly  personified;  and, 
as  soon  as  his  Lenten  sermons  were  finished,  he  was  offered  the  see  of 
Gloucester.  He  declined  it  from  scruples  about  the  new  Ordinal,  the 
oath  invoking  the  Saints,  and  the  episcopal  vestments.  After  a  nine 
months'  controversy,  in  which  the  whole  bench  of  Bishops,  with  Bucer  and 
Martyr,  were  arrayed  against  him  and  only  John  a  Lasco  and  Micronius 
appeared  on  his  side,  and  after  some  weeks'  confinement  in  the  Fleet, 
Hooper  allowed  himself  to  be  consecrated.  The  simultaneous  vacancy 
of  Worcester  enabled  the  Council  to  sweep  away  one  of  Henry  VIII's 
new  bishoprics  by  uniting  it  with  Gloucester  ;  and  another  was  abolished 
by  the  translation  of  Thirlby  from  Westminster  to  Norwich,  and  the 
reunion  of  the  former  see  with  London. 

These  episcopal  changes  afforded  scope  for  another  sort  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal spoliation  ;  most  of  the  new  Bishops  were  compelled  to  alienate  some 
of  their  manors  to  courtiers  as  the  price  of  their  elevation ;  and  Ponet 
went  so  far  as  to  surrender  all  his  lands  in  return  for  a  fixed  stipend  of 
two  thousand  marks.  These  lands  were  for  the  most  part  distributed 
among  Warwick's  adherents ;  and  no  small  portion  of  the  chantry  en- 
dowments and  much  Church  plate  found  its  way  to  the  same  destination. 
Somerset  had  issued  a  commission  in  1547  for  taking  a  general  inventory 
of  Church  goods  in  order  to  prevent  tlie  private  embezzling  which  was 
so  common  just  before  and  during  the  course  of  the  Reformation;  and 
this  measure  was  supplemented  by  various  orders  to  particular  per- 
sons or  corporations  to  restore  such  plate  and  ornaments  as  they  had 
appropriated.  But  it  may  be  doubted  whether  these  prohibitions  were 
very  effectual  ;  and  after  Somerset's  fall  private  and  public  spoliation 
went  on  rapidly  until  it  culminated  (March,  1551)  in  a  comprehensive 
seizure  by  the  government  of  all  such  Church  plate  as  remained 
unappropriated. 

The  confiscation  of  chantry  lands  followed  a  similar  course.  The 
first  charge  upon  them  was  the  support  of  the  displaced  chantry  priests, 
whose  pensions  in  1549  amounted  to  a  sum  equivalent  to  between  two 


1548-51]  Progress  of  the  Reformation  503 

and  three  hundred  thousand  pounds  in  modern  currency.  The  next  was 
stated  to  be  "the  erecting  of  Grammar  schools  to  the  education  of 
youth  in  virtue  and  godliness,  the  further  augmenting  of  the  Univer- 
sities, and  better  provision  for  the  poor  and  needy."  But  the  bill 
introduced  into  Parliament  in  1549  "  for  the  making  of  schools  "  failed 
to  pass  the  House  of  Lords  ;  and  the  "  further  order  "  designed  by 
the  Protector  was  inevitably  postponed.  Meanwhile  the  confiscated 
chantry  lands  afforded  tempting  facilities  for  the  satisfaction  of  the 
King's  immediate  needs.  In  1548-9  some  five  thousand  pounds'  worth 
were  sold  and  the  jDroceeds  devoted  to  the  defence  of  the  realm.  But 
less  legitimate  practices  soon  obtained  ;  the  chantry  lands  were  regarded 
as  the  last  dish  in  the  last  course  of  the  feast  provided  by  the  wealth 
of  the  Church,  and  the  importunity  of  courtiers  correspondingly  in- 
creased. Grants  as  well  as  sales  became  common  ;  the  recipients,  with 
few  exceptions,  repudiated  the  obligation  to  provide  for  schools  out  of 
their  newly- won  lands  ;  and  the  fortunes  of  man}'  private  families  were 
raised  on  funds  intended  for  national  education.  A  few  schools  were 
founded  b}'^  private  benefactors,  and  it  is  probable  that  education  gained 
on  the  whole  by  its  emancipation  from  the  control  of  the  Church. 
But  it  was  not  until  the  closing  years  of  the  reign  that  the  govern- 
ment made  a  serious  endeavour  to  secure  the  adequate  maintenance 
of  those  schools  whose  foundations  had  been  shaken  by  the  abolition 
of  chantries  ;  and  Edward  VFs  services  to  education  consisted  princi- 
pally in  assigning  a  fixed  annual  pension  to  schools  whose  endowments 
of  much  greater  potential  value  had  been  appropriated. 

These  proceedings,  like  the  other  religious  changes  made  during 
1550  and  1551,  were  effected  by  the  action  of  the  Council,  of  indi- 
vidual Bishops,  or  of  private  persons  ;  for  Parliament,  which  Warwick 
distrusted,  did  not  meet  between  Februarj^  1550,  and  January,  1552. 
But  some  of  the  Council's  measures  were  based  upon  legislation  passed 
in  the  session  of  1549-50  ;  such  were  the  wholesale  destruction  of  old 
service  books  which  wrought  particular  havoc  among  the  libraries  of 
Oxford  and  Cambridge,  and  the  compilation  and  execution  of  the  new 
Ordinal,  which  was  published  in  March  and  brought  into  use  in  April, 
1550.  By  it  a  number  of  ceremonies  hitherto  used  at  ordinations  were 
discontinued  ;  and  it  embodied  a  clause  which  has  been  divergently 
interpreted  both  as  abolishing  and  as  retaining  all  the  minor  orders 
beneath  that  of  deacon.  Ridle}^  signalised  his  elevation  to  the  see  of 
London  by  a  severe  visitation  of  his  diocese,  and  by  reducing  the  altars 
in  St  Paul's  and  elsewhere  to  the  status  and  estimation  of  "  the  Lord's 
tables."  Corpus  Christi  Day  and  many  Saints'  days  ceased  to  be 
observed  partly  because  they  savoured  of  popery,  and  partly  because  tlie 
cessation  of  work  impeded  the  acquisition  of  wealth.  Cranmer,  Bucer, 
and  Martyr  were  secretly  busy  revising  tlie  Prayer  Book,  and  the 
Council   was   engaged   in   an  attempt  to  force  the  Princess  Mary  to 


504  Rivalry  between  Warivick  and  Somerset       [i550-i 

relinquish  her  private  masses,  when  suddenly  in  the  autumn  of  1551 
the  nation  was  startled  by  the  news  of  another  Court  revolution. 

Somerset,  after  his  submission  and  deposition  from  the  Protectorate, 
had  been  released  from  the  Tower  on  February  6,  1550.  In  April  he 
was  readmitted  to  the  Privy  Council  ;  and  in  May  he  was  made  a 
gentleman  of  the  privy  chamber  and  received  back  such  of  his  lands  as 
had  not  already  been  sold.  The  Duke's  easy-going  nature  induced  him 
readily  to  forgive  the  indignities  he  had  suffered  at  Warwick's  hands  ; 
and  in  June,  1550,  the  reconciliation  went  so  far  that  a  marriage  was 
concluded  between  the  Duke's  daughter  and  Warwick's  eldest  son.  Lord 
Lisle.  From  this  time  Somerset,  to  all  appearance,  took  an  active  part 
in  the  government.  But  it  was  clear  that  he  only  existed  on  sufferance, 
as  a  dependant  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick.  The  situation  was  too  galling 
to  last  long.  The  Duke  was  allowed  no  free  access  to  his  royal  nephew  ; 
he  was  excluded  from  the  innermost  secrets  of  the  ruling  faction,  and 
was  often  dependent  for  knowledge  of  the  government's  plans  on  such 
information  as  he  could  extract  from  attendants  on  the  King  ;  he  was 
not  only  opposed  to  almost  every  principle  on  which  Warwick  acted, 
but  was  personally  an  obstacle  to  the  achievement  of  the  designs  which 
the  Earl  was  beginning  to  cherish.  He  was  thus,  unless  he  was  willing 
to  be  Warwick's  tool,  forced  to  become  the  centre  of  active  or  passive 
resistance — the  leader  of  the  opposition,  insofar  as  Tudor  practice 
tolerated  such  a  personage.  Within  three  months  of  his  readmission  to 
the  Council  he  was  exerting  himself  to  procure  the  release  of  Gardiner, 
of  the  Earl  of  Arundel,  and  of  other  prisoners  in  the  Tower  ;  and, 
while  Warwick  was  absent,  Somerset  was  strong  enough  to  obtain  the 
Council's  promotion  or  restoration  of  several  of  his  adherents.  He 
attempted  to  prevent  the  withdrawal  of  the  Princess  Mary's  licence  to 
liear  mass,  and  sought  so  far  as  he  could  to  restore  a  friendly  feeling 
between  England  and  the  Emperor.  In  these  efforts  he  found  consider- 
able support  among  the  moderate  party  ;  and  the  spiritless  conduct  of 
foreign  affairs  by  the  new  government,  coupled  with  the  harshness  of 
its  domestic  administration,  made  many  regret  the  Protector's  deposi- 
tion. Before  the  session  of  1549-50  broke  up,  a  movement  was  initiated 
for  his  restoration  ;  the  project  was  defeated  by  a  prorogation,  but  it 
was  resolved  to  renew  it  as  soon  as  Parliament  met  again,  and  this  was 
one  of  the  reasons  why  Parliament  was  not  summoned  till  after 
Somerset's  death. 

Warwick  viewed  the  Duke's  conduct  with  anger,  which  increased  as 
his  own  growing  unpopularity  made  Somerset  appear  more  and  more 
formidable  ;  and  before  the  end  of  September,  1551,  Warwick  had  elabo- 
rated a  comprehensive  scheme  for  the  further  advancement  of  himself  and 
his  faction  and  for  the  total  ruin  of  Somerset  and  the  opposition.  Cecil, 
the  ablest  of  the  ex-Protector's  friends,  had  ingratiated  himself  with 
Warwick  by  his  zeal  against  Gardiner  at  the  time  when  Somerset  was 


I55i]  Somerset's  alleged  conspiracy  505 

endeavouring  to  procure  his  release,  and  in  September,  1550,  he  had  been 
sworn  one  of  the  two  Secretaries  of  State ;  a  year  later  (October  4, 1551) 
he  occurs  among  the  list  of  Warwick's  supporters  marked  out  for 
promotion.  Warwick  himself  was  created  Duke  of  Northumberland  ; 
Grey,  Marquis  of  Dorset,  became  Duke  of  Suffolk  ;  Wiltshire  Marquis 
of  Winchester  ;  Herbert  Earl  of  Pembroke  ;  while  knighthoods  were 
bestowed  on  Cecil,  Sidney  (Warwick's  son-in-law),  Henry  Dudley  (his 
kinsman),  and  Henry  Neville.  On  the  16th  Somerset  and  his  friends, 
including  Lord  Grey  de  Wilton,  the  Earl  of  Arundel,  and  a  dozen 
others,  were  arrested  and  sent  to  the  Tower ;  Paget  had  been  sequestered 
a  fortnight  earlier,  to  get  him  out  of  the  way. 

The  real  cause  and  occasion  of  this  sudden  coup  d'etat  are  still 
obscure.  It  is  probable  that  foreign  affairs  had  more  to  do  with  the 
matter  than  appears  on  the  surface.  The  Constable  of  France,  when 
informed  of  it,  suggested  that  Charles  V  and  the  Princess  Mary  were 
probably  at  Somerset's  back,  and  offered  to  send  French  troops  to 
Northumberland's  aid  ;  it  is  quite  as  likely  that  Henry  H  was  at  the 
bottom  of  Northumberland's  action.  Somerset  had,  since  the  days  when 
he  served  in  the  Emperor's  suite,  been  an  imperialist ;  and  Charles  V, 
who  still  professed  a  personal  friendship  for  him,  would  have  welcomed 
his  return  to  power  in  place  of  the  Francophil  administration,  which  had 
just  (June,  1551)  put  the  seal  on  its  foreign  policy  bj^  negotiating  a 
marriage  between  Edward  VI  and  Henry  IPs  daughter,  Elizabeth.  The 
dispute  with  the  Emperor  concerning  the  treatment  of  the  Princess  Mary 
was  at  its  height ;  and  it  is  possible  that  plot  and  counterplot  were  in 
essence  a  struggle  between  French  and  Imperial  influence  in  England. 
In  any  case  the  stories  told  to  the  young  King  and  published  abroad 
were  obviously  false  ;  Edward  was  informed  that  his  uncle  had  plotted 
the  murder  of  Northumberland,  Northampton,  and  Pembroke,  the  seizure 
of  the  Crown  and  other  measures  against  himself,  to  which  the  young 
King's  knowledge  of  the  fate  of  Edward  V  would  give  a  sinister  inter- 
pretation ;  the  people  of  London  were  informed  that  he  meant  to 
destroy  the  city. 

The  plot  was  said  to  have  been  hatched  in  April,  1551  ;  but  the  first 
hint  of  its  existence  was  conveyed  to  the  government  in  a  private  con- 
versation between  Northumberland  and  Sir  Thomas  Palmer  on  October  4, 
long  after  the  conspiracy,  if  it  ever  was  real,  had  been  abandoned. 
Palmer,  who  was  one  of  the  accomplices,  was  nevertheless  left  at  liberty 
for  a  fortnight  ;  he  was  never  put  upon  his  trial,  and,  when  Somerset 
was  finally  disposed  of,  he  became  Northumberland's  right-hand  man  ; 
finally,  he  confessed  before  his  death  that  his  accusation  had  been 
invented  at  Northumberland's  instigation.  The  Earl  of  Arundel,  who, 
according  to  Northumberland's  theory,  had  been  the  principal  accom- 
plice in  Somerset's  felony,  was  subsequently  readmitted  to  the  Council, 
became  Lord  Steward  of  the  Household  to  Mary  and  to  Elizabeth,  and 


506  Trial  of  Somerset  [loSi 


Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Oxford.  Paget,  at  whose  house  the 
intended  assassination  was  to  have  taken  place,  was  never  brought  into 
Court ;  neither  was  Lord  Grey,  another  accomplice,  who  was  afterwards 
made  captain  of  Guines  "  as  amends  "  for  the  unjust  charge.  To  the 
minor  conspirators  a  very  simple  principle  was  applied  quite  irrespective 
of  their  guilt  :  if  they  implicated  Somerset,  thej^  were  released  without 
trial ;  if  they  persisted  in  asserting  their  own  and  his  innocence  they 
were  executed.  But,  in  spite  of  all  Northumberland's  efforts,  no  con- 
firmation was  obtained  of  Palmer's  main  charge.  Scores  of  witnesses 
were  imprisoned  in  the  Tower  and  put  to  torture  ;  but  the  story  of  the 
intended  assassination  was  so  baseless  that  the  charge  did  not  appear 
in  any  one  of  the  five  indictments  returned  against  Somerset,  and  was 
not  so  much  as  alluded  to  in  the  examinations  of  the  Duke  himself 
and  his  chief  adherents. 

Meanwhile,  stringent  measures  were  taken  to  prevent  disturbance. 
The  creation  of  Lords-Lieutenant  put  local  administration  and  the  local 
militia  into  the  hands  of  Northumberland's  friends,  and  provided  him 
with  an  instrument  akin  to  Cromwell's  Major-generals.  London  was 
overawed  by  the  newly-organised  bands  of  gens  d''armes  ;  and  an  effort 
Avas  made  to  appease  one  source  of  dissatisfaction  by  proclaiming  a 
new  and  purified  coinage.  Parliament,  which  was  to  have  met  in 
November,  was  further  prorogued  ;  and  Northumberland's  control  of 
the  government  was  strengthened  by  a  decision  that  the  King's  order 
(he  was  just  fourteen)  should  be  absolutely  valid  without  the  counter- 
signature of  a  single  member  of  the  Council.  Lord-Chancellor  Rich 
resigned  soon  after  in  alarm  at  this  violent  measure,  and.  he  consequently 
toolc  no  part  in  Somerset's  trial.  The  tribunal  consisted  of  twenty-six  out 
of  forty-seven  peers  ;  among  them  were  Northumberland,  Northampton, 
and  Pembroke,  who  were  really  parties  in  the  case.  They  had  already 
acted  practically  as  accusers,  had  drawn  up  the  charges,  and  examined 
the  witnesses ;  they  now  assumed  the  function  of  judges,  and  after 
their  verdict  determined  whether  it  should  be  executed  or  not. 

The  trial  took  place  on  December  1  at  Westminster  Hall  ;  the 
charges  were  practicall}^  two,  one  of  treason  in  conspiring  to  imprison  a 
Privy  Councillor,  and  one  of  felony  in  inciting  to  an  unlawful  assembly. 
Both  these  offences  depended  upon  the  atrocious  statute  which,  passed 
in  the  panic  of  reaction  after  Somerset's  fall,  was  to  expire  with  the  next 
session  of  Parliament  —  a  further  reason  for  its  prorogation.  In  another 
respect  the  trial  would  not  have  been  possible  under  any  other  Act ;  for 
that  Act  removed  the  previous  limitation  of  thirty  days  within  which 
accusations  must  be  preferred,  and  five  months  had  elapsed  between 
Somerset's  alleged  offences  and  Palmer's  accusation.  Nevertheless  the 
charge  of  treason  broke  down,  and  the  government  boasted  of  its 
magnanimity  in  condemning  the  prisoner  to  death  only  for  felony. 
There  was  as  little  evidence  for  that  offence  as  for  the  other,  and  the 


1552]  Execution  of  Somerset. — Second  Act  of  Uniformity  507 

sum  of  the  ex-Protector's  guilt  appears  to  have  been  this  :  he  had  spoken 
to  one  or  two  friends  of  the  advisability  of  arresting  Northumberland, 
Northampton,  and  Pembroke,  calling  a  Parliament,  and  demanding  an 
account  of  their  evil  government. 

Somerset  was  sent  back  to  the  Tower  amid  extravagant  demonstra- 
tions of  joy  by  the  people,  who  thought  he  had  been  acquitted.  He 
remained  there  seven  weeks,  and  there  was  a  general  expectation  that  no 
further  steps  would  be  taken  against  him.  Parliament,  however,  was  to 
meet  on  January  23,  and  it  was  certain  that  a  movement  in  Somerset's 
favour  would  be  made.  Northumberland  had  endeavoured  to  strengthen 
his  faction  in  the  Commons  by  forcing  his  nominees  on  vacant  constituen- 
cies ;  but  his  hold  on  Parliament  remained  nevertheless  weaker  than 
that  of  his  rival,  and  it  was  therefore  determined  to  get  rid  of 
Somerset  once  and  for  all.  An  order  of  the  King  drawn  up  on 
January  18  for  the  trial  of  Somerset's  accomplices,  was,  before  its  sub- 
mission to  the  Council  on  the  following  day,  transformed  by  erasures  and 
interlineations  into  an  order  for  the  Duke's  execution.  No  record  of 
the  proceedings  was  entered  in  the  Council's  register ;  but  Cecil,  with 
a  view  to  future  contingencies,  secured  the  King's  memorandum  and 
inscribed  on  the  back  of  it  the  names  of  the  Councillors  who  were 
present.  Somerset's  execution  took  place  at  sunrise  on  the  22nd  ; 
in  spite  of  elaborate  precautions  a  riot  nearly  broke  out,  but  the 
Duke  made  no  effort  to  turn  to  account  the  popular  sympathy.  He 
had  resigned  himself  to  his  fate,  and  died  with  exemplary  courage  and 
dignity. 

Parliament  met  on  the  following  day,  and  it  soon  proved  that 
Northumberland  had  been  wise  in  liis  generation.  Parliament  could  not 
restore  Somerset  to  life,  but  it  could  at  least  ensure  that  no  one  should 
again  be  condemned  by  similar  methods.  It  rejected  a  new  treason  bill 
designed  to  supply  the  place  of  the  former  expiring  Act,  and  passed 
anotlier  providing  that  accusations  must  be  made  within  three  months 
of  the  offence,  and  that  the  prisoner  must  be  confronted  with  two 
witnesses  to  his  crime.  The  House  of  Commons  also  refused  to  pass 
a  bill  of  attainder  against  Tunstall,  Bishop  of  Durham,  who  had  been 
imprisoned  on  a  vague  charge  remotely  connected  with  Somerset's  pre- 
tended plots.  His  bishopric  was,  however,  marked  out  for  spoliation,  and 
a  few  months  later  Tunstall  was  deprived  by  a  civil  Court.  Parliament 
was  more  complaisant  in  religious  matters,  and  passed  the  Second  Act  of 
Uniformity,  besides  another  Act  removing  from  tlie  marriage  of  priests  the 
stigma  hitherto  attaching  to  the  practice  as  being  only  a  licensed  evil. 
The  Second  Act  of  Uniformity  extended  the  scope  of  religious  persecu- 
tion by  imposing  penalties  for  recusancy  upon  laymen  ;  if  they  neglected 
to  attend  common  prayer  on  Sundays  and  holidays,  they  were  to  be 
subject  to  ecclesiastical  censures  and  excommunication  ;  if  they  attended 
any  but  the  authorised  form  of  worship,  they  were  liable  to  six  months' 


508  Second  Bookof  Common  Frai/er.FinancialdifficuUies[i5m 

imprisonment  for  the  first  offence,  a  year's  imprisonment  for  the  second, 
and  lifelong  imprisonment  for  the  third. 

This  Second  Act  of  Uniformity  also  imposed  a  Second  Book  of 
Common  Prayer.  The  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer  had  scarcely 
received  the  sanction  of  Parliament  in  1549,  when  it  began  to  be 
attacked  as  a  halting  makeshift  by  the  Reformers.  The  fact  that 
Gardiner  expressed  a  modified  approval  of  it  was  enough  to  condemn 
it  in  their  eyes,  and  in  the  Second  Book  tliose  parts  which  had  won 
Gardiner's  approval  were  carefully  eliminated  or  revised.  The  Prayer 
Book  of  1549  was  elaborately  examined  by  Bucer  and  more  superficially 
by  Peter  Martyr  ;  but  the  changes  actually  made  were  rather  on  lines 
indicated  by  Cranmer  in  his  controversy  with  Gardiner  than  on  those 
suggested  by  Bucer  ;  and  the  actual  revision  was  done  by  the  Archbishop, 
assisted  at  times  by  Ridley.  There  is  no  proof  that  Convocation  was 
consulted  in  the  matter,  nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  the  Book  under- 
went modification  in  its  passage  through  Parliament.  The  net  result  was 
to  minimise  the  possibility  of  such  Catholic  interpretations  as  had  been 
placed  on  the  earlier  Book  ;  in  particular  the  Communion  Office  was 
radically  altered  until  it  approached  very  nearly  to  the  Zwinglian  idea  of 
a  commemorative  rite.  The  celebrated  Black  Rubric,  explaining  away 
tlie  significance  of  the  ceremony  of  kneeling  at  Communion,  was  inserted 
on  the  Council's  authority  after  the  Act  had  been  passed  by  Parliament. 
Two  other  ecclesiastical  measures  of  importance  were  the  Reformatio 
legum  ecdesiastioariirn  and  the  compilation  of  the  Forty-two  Articles. 
The  Articles  of  Religion,  originally  drawn  up  by  Cranmer,  were  revised 
at  the  Council's  direction  and  did  not  receive  the  royal  signature  until 
June,  1553,  while  Parliament  in  the  same  year  refused  its  sanction  to 
the  Book  of  Canon  Law  prepared  by  the  commissioners ;  lay  objections 
to  spiritual  jurisdiction  were  the  same,  whether  it  was  exercised  by 
Catholic  or  bj^  Protestant  prelates. 

The  extensive  reduction  of  Church  ritual  effected  by  the  Second  Act 
of  Uniformity  rendered  superfluous  a  large  quantity  of  Church  property, 
and  for  its  sei/Aire  by  the  Crown  the  government's  financial  embarrass- 
ments supplied  an  obvious  motive.  The  subsidies  granted  in  1549-50, 
the  money  paid  for  the  restitution  of  Boulogne,  profits  made  by  the 
debasement  of  the  coinage,  and  other  sources,  had  enabled  Northumber- 
land to  tide  over  the  Parliament  of  1552,  without  demanding  from  it 
any  further  financial  aid.  But  these  sources  were  now  exhausted,  and  in 
the  ensuing  summer  the  final  gleanings  from  the  Church  were  gathered 
in.  Such  chantry  lands  as  had  not  been  sold  or  granted  away  were  now 
disposed  of  ;  all  unnecessary  church  ornaments  were  appropriated  ;  the 
lands  of  the  dissolved  bishoprics  and  attainted  conspirators  were  placed 
on  the  market  ;  church  bells  were  taken  down,  organs  were  removed,  and 
lead  was  stripped  off  the  roofs.  When  these  means  failed,  the  heroic 
measure  was  proposed  of  demanding  an  account  from  all  Crown  officers 


1551-3]  NortJmmherlaiid^ s  critical  position  509 

of  moneys  received  during  the  last  twenty  years.  Still  there  was  a 
deficit ;  and  in  the  winter  Northumberland  was  reduced  to  appealing  to 
Parliament. 

By  this  time  his  government  had  become  so  unpopuhir  that  he 
shrank  from  meeting  a  really  representative  assembly,  and  had  recourse 
to  an  expedient  which  has  been  misrepresented  as  the  normal  practice  of 
Tudor  times.  There  had  already  been  isolated  instances  of  the  exercise 
of  government  influence  to  force  particular  candidates  on  constituencies  ; 
but  the  Parliament  of  March,  1553,  was  the  only  one  in  the  sixteenth 
century  that  can  fairly  be  described  as  nominated  by  the  government  ; 
and  Renard,  when  discussing  the  question  of  a  Parliament  in  the 
following  August,  asked  Charles  V  whether  he  thought  it  advisable  to 
have  a  general  Parliament  or  merely  an  assembly  of  "  notables  "  summoned 
after  the  manner  introduced  by  Northumberland.  A  circular  appears  to 
have  been  sent  round  ordering  the  electors  to  return  the  members  nomi- 
nated by  the  Council.  Even  this  measure  was  not  considered  sufficient  to 
ensure  a  properly  subservient  House  of  Commons  ;  and  at  the  same  time 
eleven  newboroughs  returning  twenty-two  members  were  created, princi- 
pally in  Cornwall,  where  Crown  influence  was  supreme.  The  process  of 
packing  had  already  been  applied  to  the  Privy  Council,  more  than  half  of 
which,  as  it  existed  in  1553,  had  been  nominated  since  Northumberland's 
accession  to  power.  To  this  Parliament  the  Duke  represented  his  financial 
needs  as  exclusively  due  to  the  maladministration  of  the  Protector,  who 
had  been  deposed  three  and  a  half  years  before  ;  and  a  subsidy  was  granted 
which  was  not,  however,  to  be  paid  for  two  years.  Acts  were  also  passed 
with  a  view  to  checking  fiscal  abuses  ;  but  Northumberland  again  met 
with  some  traces  of  independence  in  the  Commons,  and  Parliament  was 
dissolved  on  March  31,  having  sat  for  barely  a  month. 

The  ground  was  fast  slipping  from  under  Northumberland's  feet,  and 
the  Nemesis  which  had  long  dogged  his  steps  was  drawing  perceptibly 
nearer.  Zimri  had  no  peace,  and  from  the  time  of  Somerset's  fall  never 
a  month  passed  without  some  symptom  of  popular  discontent.  In 
October,  1551,  a  rumour  spread  that  a  coinage  was  being  minted  at 
Dudley  Castle  stamped  with  Northumberland's  badge,  tlie  bear  and 
ragged  staff,  and  in  1552  he  was  widely  believed  to  be  aiming  at  the 
Crown.  Even  some  of  his  favourite  preachers  began  to  denounce  him  in 
thinly  veiled  terms  from  the  pulpit.  No  longer  a  Moses  or  Joshua,  he 
was  not  obscurely  likened  to  Ahitophel.  His  only  support  was  the 
young  King,  over  whose  mind  he  had  established  complete  dominion ;  and 
Edward  VI  was  now  slowly  dying  before  his  eyes.  The  consequences 
to  himself  of  a  demise  of  the  Crown  were  only  too  clear  ;  his  ambition 
had  led  him  into  so  many  crimes  and  had  made  him  so  many  enemies 
that  his  life  was  secure  only  so  long  as  he  controlled  the  government 
and  prevented  the  administration  of  justice.  There  was  no  room  for 
repentance ;  he  could  expect  no  mercy  when  his  foes  were  once  in  a 


510  Edward  VFs  ''device''  [1553 

position  to  bring  him  to  book.  The  accession  of  ]Mary  would  almost 
inevitably  be  followed  by  his  own  attainder  ;  and  the  prospect  drove 
him  to  make  one  last  desperate  bid  for  life  and  for  power. 

There  were  other  temptations  which  led  him  to  stake  his  all  on  a 
single  throw.  No  immediate  interference  need  be  feared  from  abroad. 
Scotland,  now  little  more  than  a  province  of  France,  had  no  desire  to  see 
a  half-Spanish  princess  on  the  English  throne,  and  France  was  even  more 
reluctant  to  witness  the  transference  of  England's  resources  to  the  hands 
of  Charles  V.  The  Emperor  was  fully  occupied  with  the  French  war, 
and  Mary  had  nothing  on  which  to  rely  except  the  temper  of  England. 
Northumberland's  endeavour  to  alter  the  Succession  might  well  seem 
worth  the  making.  He  could  appeal  to  the  fact  that  no  woman  had  sat 
on  the  English  throne,  and  that  the  only  attempt  to  place  one  there  had 
been  followed  by  civil  war.  Margaret  Beaufort  had  been  excluded  in 
favour  of  her  son  ;  and  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII  there  were  not  wanting 
those  who  preferred  the  claim  of  an  illegitimate  son  to  that  of  a  legiti- 
mate daughter.  He  could  also  plaj^  upon  the  dread  of  religious  reaction 
and  of  foreign  domination  which  would  ensue  if  Mary  succeeded  and, 
as  she  probably  would,  married  an  alien.  The  Netherlands,  Hungary, 
and  Bohemia  had  all  by  marriage  been  brought  under  Habsburg  rule  and 
with  disastrous  consequences ;  might  not  England  be  reserved  for  a  similar 
fate  ?  Some  of  these  objections  applied  also  to  the  Princess  Elizabeth, 
but  not  all,  and  Northumberland  would  have  stood  a  better  chance  of 
success  had  he  selected  as  his  candidate  the  daughter  of  Anne  Boleyn. 
But  such  a  solution  would  not  necessarily  have  meant  a  continuance  of 
his  own  supremacy,  and  that  was  the  vital  point. 

Hence  the  Duke  had  recourse  to  a  plan  which  was  hopelessly  illegal, 
illogical,  unpopular,  and  unconstitutional.  Edward  VI  was  induced  to 
settle  the  Crown  on  Lady  Jane  Grey,  the  grand-daughter  of  Henry  VIII's 
sister,  ]\Iary,  Duchess  of  Suffolk  ;  she  was  married  to  Northumberland's 
fourth  son.  Guilford  Dudley,  and  Dudley  was  to  receive  the  Crown 
matrimonial,  and  thus  mitigate  the  objections  to  a  female  sovereign. 
The  arrangement  was  illegal,  because  Edward  VI  had  not  been  empowered 
by  law,  as  Henry  had,  to  leave  the  Crown  by  will  ;  and  any  attempt  to 
alter  the  Succession  established  by  Parliament  and  by  Henry's  will  was 
treason.  It  was  illogical,  because,  even  supposing  that  Henry's  will 
could  be  set  aside  and  his  two  daughters  excluded  as  illegitimate,  the 
next  claimant  was  Mary,  Queen  of  Scots,  the  grand-daughter  of  Henry's 
elder  sister  Margaret.  Moreover,  if  the  Suffolk  line  was  adopted,  the 
proper  heir  was  Lady  Jane's  mother,  the  wife  of  Henry  Grey,  Duke  of 
Suffolk.  There  was  thus  little  to  recommend  the  King's  '•  device  "  except 
the  arbitrary  will  of  Northumberland,  who  in  May,  1553,  endeavoured  to 
implicate  his  chief  supporters  in  the  plot  by  a  series  of  dynastic  marriages. 
His  daughter  Catharine  was  given  to  Lord  Hastings  ;  Lady  Jane's  sister 
Catharine  to  Pembroke's  son.  Lord  Herbert ;  and  Ladv  Jane's  cousin 


1553]  Death  of  Ediuard  VI  511 

Margaret  Clifford  (another  possible  claimant)  to  Northumberland's 
brother  Andrew.  The  news  of  these  arrangements  confirmed  the  popular 
suspicions  of  the  Duke's  designs,  and  during  the  month  of  June  foreign 
ambassadors  in  London  were  kept  pretty  well  informed  of  the  progress  of 
the  plot.  The  reluctant  consent  of  the  Council  was  obtained  by  a  promise 
that  Parliament  should  be  summoned  at  once  to  confirm  the  settlement  ; 
and  on  June  11  the  judges  were  ordered  to  draw  up  letters  patent 
embodying  the  young  King's  wishes.  They  resisted  at  first,  but  Edward's 
urgent  commands,  Northumberland's  violence,  and  a  pardon  under  the 
Great  Seal  for  their  action  at  length  extorted  compliance.  On  the  21st 
the  Council  with  some  open  protests  and  many  mental  reservations 
signed  the  letters  patent.  The  Tower  had  been  secured  ;  troops  had 
been  hastily  raised  ;  and  the  fleet  had  been  manned.  Every  precaution 
that  fear  could  inspire  had  been  taken  when  the  last  male  Tudor  died 
on  July  6  at  Greenwich  ;  nothing  remained  but  for  the  nation  to  declare, 
through  such  channels  as  were  still  left  open,  its  verdict  on  the  claims 
of  Mary  and  the  Duke  of  Northumberland's  rule. 


CHAPTER   XV 


PHILIP   AI^D   MARY 


The  contention  of  religious  parties  amid  which  the  reign  of  Mary 
commenced  —  the  legacy  of  the  preceding  reign  —  still  further  weakened 
the  royal  authority  at  home,  while  it  materiall}^  lowered  England  in  the 
estimation  of  the  great  Powers  abroad.  The  Protector  Somerset  had 
failed  to  accomplish  the  design  to  which  he  had  devoted  his  best 
energies,  that  of  Union  with  Scotland,  whereby  the  United  Kingdom 
should  assert  its  position  as  the  leading  Protestant  State  in  Europe. 
The  innate  cruelty  of  Northumberland's  nature,  as  seen  in  the  merciless 
malignity  with  which  he  brought  his  rival  to  the  scaffold,  and  carried 
out  the  reversal  of  his  policy,  had  caused  him  to  be  regarded  with 
aversion  by  the  great  majority  of  his  countrymen  ;  while  the  humiliating 
circumstances  under  which  peace  had  been  concluded  both  with  France 
and  with  Scotland  had  revealed  alike  the  financial  and  the  moral  weak- 
ness of  the  nation.  Not  only  had  the  rulers  of  the  country  themselves 
ceased  to  be  actuated  by  a  statesmanlike  and  definite  foreign  policy,  but 
the  leading  Powers  on  the  Continent  had  gradually  come  to  regard 
England  from  a  different  point  of  view.  The  revenue  of  the  English 
Crown  was  but  a  fraction  of  that  which  Henry  II  of  France  or  Charles  V 
could  raise.  And  by  degrees  the  country  whose  King,  a  generation 
before,  had  hurled  defiance  at  Rome  and  treated  on  equal  terms  with 
Spain  and  France,  had  come  to  be  looked  upon  by  these  latter  Powers  as 
one  whose  government  and  people  were  alike  fickle  and  untrustworthy, 
and  whose  policy  vacillated  and  rulers  changed  so  often  as  to  render  its 
alliance  a  matter  scarcely  deserving  serious  diplomatic  effort,  its  annexa- 
tion far  from  impracticable.  But  whether  that  annexation  would  have 
to  be  effected  by  diplomacy  or  by  force,  by  a  matrimonial  alliance  or  by 
actual  conquest,  was  still  uncertain.  Such,  however,  was  the  alternative 
that  chiefly  engaged  the  thoughts  of  the  representatives  of  the  great 
continental  Powers  during  the  reign  of  Mary. 

When  we  turn  to  consider  the  instruments  who  served  their 
diplomacy  in  England,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  envoys  of  both 
France   and    Spain   were    well    fitted   to    represent    their    respective 

612 


1553]  The  leading  diplomatists  of  the  reign  513 

sovereigns.  The  bad  faith  and  cynical  inconsistency  of  Henry  II  re- 
appeared in  the  mischievous  intrigues  and  shameless  mendacity  of 
Antoine  de  Noailles.  The  astute  and  wary  policy  of  the  Emperor  was 
not  inadequately  reproduced  by  the  energetic  and  adroit,  althougli 
sometimes  too  impetuous,  Simon  Renard.  On  the  Venetian  envoys, 
Giacomo  Soranzo  and  Giovanni  Michiel,  it  devolved  carefully  to  observe 
rather  than  to  seek  to  guide  events ;  and  the  latter,  although  designated 
an  imperialist  by  de  Noailles,  appears  to  have  preserved  a  studiously 
impartial  attitude  ;  while  the  accuracy  of  his  information  was  such  that 
the  French  ambassador  did  not  scruple  to  avail  himself  of  the  dishonesty 
of  Michiel's  secretary,  Antonio  Mazza,  to  purchase  clandestinely  much 
of  the  intelligence  transmitted  to  the  Doge  of  Venice  by  his  envoy. 

In  the  selection  of  her  representatives  at  the  foregoing  Courts,  Mary, 
on  the  other  hand,  does  not  appear  to  have  been  unduly  biassed  by  personal 
predilections.  Thirlby,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  afterwards  stood  high  in  her 
favour ;  but  when,  in  April,  1553,  he  was  for  the  second  time  accredited 
ambassador  to  the  Emperor,  it  was  under  the  auspices  of  Northumberland. 
Expediency  alone  can  have  suggested  that  Nicholas  Wotton  and  Peter 
Vannes,  both  of  whom  had  taken  an  active  part  in  the  proceedings 
connected  with  the  divorce  of  Catharine  of  Aragon,  should  be  retained 
at  their  posts,  —  the  one  in  Paris,  the  other  in  Venice.  Wotton's  loyalty 
to  his  new  sovereign,  his  ability  and  courage,  were  alike  unquestionable ; 
and  when,  in  1555-7,  Mary's  throne  was  threatened  by  the  machinations 
of  the  English  exiles,  it  was  to  his  vigilance  and  dexterity  that  the 
English  government  was  mainly  indebted  for  its  earliest  information  of 
the  conspirators'  intentions.  At  Venice,  Peter  Vannes  discharged  his 
duties  as  ambassador  with  commendable  discretion  and  assiduity, 
although,  at  one  critical  juncture,  he  did  not  escape  the  reproach  of 
excessive  caution.  But  as  a  native  of  Lucca,  and  one  who  had  been 
collector  of  the  papal  taxes  in  England,  who  had  filled  the  post  of  Latin 
secretary  to  Wolsey,  King  Henry  and  King  Edward  in  succession,  and 
who  had  been  employed  on  more  than  one  important  diplomatic  mission, 
he  offered  a  combination  of  qualifications  which  it  would  have  been 
difficult  to  match.  Although  he  was  nearly  sixty  years  of  age,  his  energies 
showed  no  decline  ;  and  Mary  herself  could  suggest  no  one  more  fit  to 
be  her  representative  at  the  Venetian  Court. 

The  6th  of  July,  the  day  of  Edward's  death,  had  not  passed  away 
before  the  Council  were  apprised  of  the  event ;  but  it  was  decided  that 
the  fact  should  be  kept  strictly  secret  until  the  necessary  measures 
had  been  taken  for  securing  the  succession  of  the  Lady  Jane  Grey.  In 
pursuance  of  this  decision,  Howard  (the  Lord  Admiral),  the  Marquis  of 
Westminster  (tlie  Lord  Treasurer),  and  the  Earl  of  Shrev/sbury  forth- 
with placed  a  strong  garrison  in  the  Tower ;  while  the  civic  authorities 
were  summoned  to  appear,  through  their  representatives,  before  the 
Council  at  Greenwich.     The  Lord  Mayor,  together  with  "  six  aldermen, 


614  Proclamation  of  Jane.     Flight  of  Mary  [i553 

as  many  merchants  of  the  staple  and  as  many  merchant  adventurers," 
accordingly  repaired  thither,  when  the  late  monarch's  decease  was  made 
known  to  them,  and  the  letters  patent,  whereby  he  had  devised  the 
Succession  to  the  House  of  Suffolk,  were  laid  before  them.  These  they 
were  called  upon  to  sign,  and  also  to  take  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  Queen 
Jane.  They  were,  however,  charged  to  divulge  nothing,  but  quietly  to 
take  whatever  measures  they  might  deem  requisite  for  the  preservation 
of  order  in  the  City,  and  to  procure  the  acquiescence  of  the  citizens  in 
the  succession  of  their  new  sovereign;  and,  at  three  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon  of  Monday  (the  10th),  Jane  was  conveyed  by  water  to  the 
Tower,  where  she  was  formally  received  as  Queen.  At  five  o'clock, 
public  proclamation  was  made  both  of  Edward's  death  and  of  the  fact 
that  by  his  decree  "  the  Lady  Jane  and  her  heirs  male  "  were  to  be  his 
recognised  successors.  Printed  copies  of  the  document  which  the  late 
King  had  executed  were  at  the  same  time  circulated  among  the  people, 
in  order  to  make  clear  the  grounds  on  which  the  claim  of  the  new 
Queen  rested. 

In  the  meantime,  two  days  before  her  brother's  death,  Mary,  apprised 
of  the  hopeless  nature  of  his  illness,  had  effected  her  escape  by  night 
from  Hunsdon  to  her  palace  at  Kenninghall,  an  ancient  structure, 
formerly  belonging  to  the  Dukes  of  Norfolk,  which  had  been  bestowed 
on  her  by  Henry  on  the  attainder  of  the  actual  Duke.  The  Princess  had 
formerly  been  accustomed  to  hold  her  Court  there ;  but  the  buildings 
were  ill  adapted  for  defence,  and  on  the  11th  she  quitted  Kenningliall 
for  Framlingham  in  Suffolk.  Framlingham,  another  of  the  seats  of  the 
Howards,  was  situated  in  the  district  where  Northumberland's  ruthless 
suppression  of  the  rebellion  of  1549  was  still  fresh  in  the  memories  of 
the  population ;  and  the  strength  and  position  of  the  castle  surmounted 
by  lofty  towers  and  on  the  margin  of  a  wide  expanse  of  water,  made  it 
an  excellent  rallying-point  for  Mary's  supporters.  Moreover,  being 
distant  but  a  few  miles  from  the  coast,  it  offered  facilities  for  escape  to 
the  Continent,  should  such  a  necessity  arise.  Within  less  than  forty- 
eight  hours  it  had  become  known  to  Northumberland  in  London,  that 
the  Earl  of  Bath,  Sir  Thomas  Wharton,  Sir  John  Mordaunt,  Sir  William 
Drury,  Sir  Henry  Bedingfield  (formerly  the  custodian  of  Mary's  mother  at 
Kimbolton),  along  with  other  noblemen  and  gentlemen,  some  of  them  at 
the  head  of  a  considerable  body  of  retainers,  were  gathering  at  Fram- 
lingham. The  Council,  on  assembling  at  the  Tower  on  the  12th,  had 
already  decided  that  it  was  expedient  for  the  security  of  the  realm,  that 
Mary  should  forthwith  be  brought  to  London ;  and  Suffolk  was,  in  the 
5rst  instance,  designated  for  the  task  of  giving  effect  to  their  decision. 
Jane,  however,  overcome  by  a  sense  of  responsibility  and  by  nervous 
appi'ehension,  entreated  that  her  father  might  be  permitted  "  to  tarry  at 
home  to  keep  her  company "  ;  and  Northumberland  was  accordingly 
called  upon  to  proceed  on  the  perilous  errand.     The  terror  which  his 


1553]  Northuinherland  marches  against  Mary  515 

name  was  likely  to  inspire,  and  his  reputation  as  "  the  best  manne  of 
war  in  the  realme,"  might  be  looked  upon  as  justifying  his  selection. 
But  on  the  other  hand  it  was  also  notorious  tliat  throughout  the  eastern 
counties  his  name  was  held  in  execration  as  that  of  the  man  who  had 
brought  Somerset  to  the  scaffold  ;  and  the  rumour  was  already  spreading 
widely  that  he  had,  by  foul  play,  precipitated  the  death  of  the  young 
King.  The  wishes  of  the  Council  were,  however,  too  strongly  urged  for 
him  to  be  able  to  decline  the  errand  ;  and  the  following  day  was  devoted 
to  making  ready  for  the  expedition  and  to  the  arming  of  a  sufficient 
retinue.  When  the  Lords  of  the  Council  assembled  at  dinner,  North- 
umberland availed  himself  of  the  opportunity  to  deliver  an  harangue 
in  which  he  adverted  to  the  perils  awaiting  him  and  his  followers, 
and  commended  the  families  of  the  latter  to  the  care  of  his  audience. 
He  further  reminded  those  who  listened,  that  to  "  the  originall 
grounde  "  on  which  their  policy  rested  —  "the  preferment  of  Goddes 
Word  and  the  feare  of  papestry's  re-entrance  "  —  there  was  now  added 
the  new  oath  of  allegiance,  which  bound  them  to  support  the  Queen's 
cause,  and  he  adjured  them  to  be  faithful  to  their  vow. 

On  Friday,  July  14,  he  set  out  with  his  forces  through  the  sti^eets  of 
London ;  but  the  absence  of  all  sympathy  on  the  part  of  the  populace 
either  with  him  or  his  errand  was  only  too  apparent.  He  himself,  as  he 
passed  along  Shoreditch,  was  heard  to  exclaim  :  "  The  people  press  to  see 
us,  but  not  one  sayeth  '  God  speed  ye  ! '  "  Under  the  belief  that  ]\lary's 
change  of  residence  to  Framlingham  was  simply  designed  to  facilitate 
her  escape  to  Flanders,  he  had  some  days  before  given  orders  that  ships 
carrying  picked  crews  to  the  number  of  two  thousand  men  should  be 
stationed  off  the  Norfolk  coast  to  intercept  her  passage.  The  spirits  of 
Mary's  supporters  at  this  crisis  were  far  from  high ;  nor  Avas  Charles  at 
Brussels  by  any  means  sanguine  in  his  niece's  cause.  His  instructions, 
transmitted  on  June  23  to  his  ambassadors  extraordinary  to  the  English 
Court  while  they  were  still  at  Calais,  were  drawn  up  in  contemplation  of 
the  crisis  which  seemed  likely  to  arise  on  Edward's  death,  which  was 
even  then  regarded  as  imminent.  On  their  arrival  in  London  they  were 
forthwith  to  obtain,  if  possible,  an  interview  with  the  young  King ;  and 
precise  directions  were  given  with  respect  to  their  attitude  towards 
Northumberland  and  the  Council.  In  the  event  of  Edward's  death, 
Mary's  best  policy,  Charles  considered,  would  be  her  betrothal  to  one 
of  her  own  countrymen;  — the  machinations  of  France  would  thus  be 
effectually  counteracted,  the  mistrust  of  Northumberland  and  his  party 
would  be  disarmed.  It  would  be  well  also  to  come  as  soon  as  might 
be  to  a  general  understanding  with  the  Council ;  a  result  wliich,  the 
imperial  adviser  considered,  might  be  attained  by  Mary's  undertaking  to 
introduce  no  innovations  either  in  the  administration  of  civil  affairs  or 
in  religion,  and  at  the  same  time  concluding  a  kind  of  amnesty  Avith 
those  actually  in  office,  —  "  patiently  waiting  until  God  should  vouchsafe 


516  Proclamation,  of  Queen  Mary  [i553 

the  opportunity  of  restoring  everything  by  peaceful  means. "  His  envoys 
were  also  enjoined  to  give  his  niece  all  possible  assistance  and  advice  in 
connexion  with  any  obligations  she  might  enter  into  with  the  Council 
and  any  pledges  she  might  give. 

Edward's  death,  followed  within  a  week  by  that  of  Maurice  of 
Saxony  from  a  wound  received  in  the  battle  of  Sievershausen,  materially 
modified  the  aspect  of  affairs.  On  the  Continent,  Charles  was  now  able 
to  concentrate  his  efforts  on  the  conflict  with  France  ;  while  in  England 
the  remarkable  cliange  in  Mary's  prospects  constrained  both  Catholic 
and  Protestant  writers  to  recognise  in  results  so  rapidly  attained  an 
express  intervention  of  Providence. 

The  first  report  transmitted  to  Charles  by  his  ambassadors  after 
their  arrival  in  London  conveyed  the  tidings  of  Edward's  death,  and  of 
Northumberland's  occupation  of  the  Tower  as  champion  of  the  cause  of 
the  Lady  Jane  Grey.  It  further  stated  that  Mary,  after  taking  counsel 
with  her  confidants,  had  been  proclaimed  Queen  at  Framlingham,  a 
course  adopted  under  the  belief  that  large  numbers  would  thus  be 
encouraged  openly  to  declare  themselves  in  her  favour.  In  the  opinion 
of  Renard  himself,  however,  she  was  committing  herself  to  a  line  of 
action  which,  considering  the  resources  at  Northumberland's  command, 
the  support  which  he  was  regularly  receiving  from  France,  and  the 
actual  complications  in  continental  affairs,  must  be  pronounced  hopeless. 
Charles  in  his  reply  (July  11,  1553)  advised  his  envoys  to  content  them- 
selves for  the  present  with  watcliing  the  situation ;  but  he  suggested 
that,  if  Northumberland  persisted  in  his  opposition  to  Mary's  claims,  it 
might  be  well  to  endeavour  to  persuade  those  English  peers  who  favoured 
the  Catholic  cause  to  make  such  a  demonstration  as  might  serve  to  render 
the  Duke  more  amenable  to  reason.  Renard's  misgivings  were,  however, 
soon  modified  by  further  and  more  accurate  intelligence  ;  and  in  a  letter 
to  Prince  Philip  he  was  able  to  report  that  Paget  had  resumed  his  seat 
in  the  Council,  in  whose  policy  a  complete  change  had  taken  place. 
Then  came  news  that  on  July  19,  while  the  rebel  leaders  were  marching 
from  Cambridge  to  attack  the  castle  at  Framlingham,  Mary  had  been 
proclaimed  on  Tower  Hill  by  vSuffolk  himself,  and  again  at  Paul's  Cross, 
and  that  he  had  at  the  same  time  given  orders  that  the  insignia  of 
royalty  should  be  removed  from  hi^  daughter's  chambers.  The  diarist 
at  his  post  in  the  Tower  and  the  imperial  ambassadors  in  the  City 
concur  in  describing  the  demonstrations  which  followed  as  characterised 
by  remarkable  enthusiasm,  —  the  bonfires  and  roaring  cannon,  the  pealing 
bells  and  sonorous  long-disused  organs,  the  profuse  largesses, — all  offer- 
ing a  marked  contrast  to  the  apathy  and  silence  with  which  the  procla- 
mation of  Jane  had  been  received.  The  Council  now  sent  off  ofiicial 
information  of  the  event  to  Mary,  who  was  at  the  same  time  advised  not 
to  disarm  her  forces  until  Northumberland's  submission  or  defeat  was 
beyond  doubt.     Three  days  later  Renard  was  able  to  report  that  the 


1553]  Discomfiture  of  Jane's  siqjporters  517 

proclamation  had  everywhere  been  so  favourably  received  that  Mary 
might  now  be  regarded  as  secure  in  her  position  "  as  true  and  heredi- 
tary Queen  of  England,  without  difficulty,  doubt,  or  impediment." 

While  events  were  progressing  thus  rapidly  in  London  Northumber- 
land, accompanied  by  the  Marquis  of  Northampton  and  Lord  Grey,  had 
arrived  on  the  evening  of  Saturday,  July  15,  at  Cambridge.  Here  he 
rested  for  the  Sunday,  and  as  both  Lord  High  Steward  and  Chancellor 
of  the  University  was  hospitably  entertained  by  the  academic  authorities. 
On  the  Monday  he  set  out  for  Bury  St  Edmunds,  expecting  to  be  joined 
at  Newmarket  by  the  reinforcements  from  the  capital.  These  however 
failed  to  appear,  while  defections  from  his  own  ranks  became  numerous ; 
and  he  now  learned  that  the  crews  of  the  ships  sent  to  intercept  INIary's 
passage,  had,  on  arriving  at  Yarmouth,  declared  for  her,  and  their  cap- 
tains had  followed  their  example.  On  the  18th,  accordingly,  North- 
vimberland  set  out  on  his  return  from  Bury  to  Cambridge,  where  at  five 
o'clock  on  the  evening  of  the  20th,  the  news  having  arrived  that  Mary 
had  been  proclaimed  in  London,  he  himself  also  proclaimed  her  in  the 
market-place ;  and,  as  the  tears  ran  down  his  face,  ejaculated  that  he 
knew  her  to  be  a  merciful  woman.  An  hour  later  he  received  an  order 
from  the  Council.  It  was  signed  by  Cranmer,  Goodrich  (Bishop  of  Ely 
and  Lord  Chancellor),  the  Marquis  of  Winchester,  the  Duke  of  Suffolk, 
and  the  Earls  of  Pembroke,  Bedford,  and  Shrewsbury,  and  directed  him 
forthwith  to  disarm  and  disband  his  army,  but  not  himself  to  return  to 
London  until  the  royal  pleasure  was  known.  If  he  would  thus  "shew 
himselfe  like  a  good  quiet  subject,"  the  missive  went  on  to  say,  "  wee 
will  then  continue  as  we  have  begun,  as  humble  suters  to  our  Soueraigne 
Lady  the  Queenes  Higlmesse,  for  him  and  his  and  for  our  selves." 

The  Cambridge  authorities  now  hastened  to  send  congratulatory 
letters  to  Framlingham ;  while  Gardiner,  the  former  Chancellor  of  the 
University,  w\as  re-elected  to  that  office.  In  the  letter  announcing  his 
re-election  he  was  urged  to  restore  to  the  Schools  their  former  freedom 
and  "  to  annul  the  lawless  laws  which  held  their  consciences  in  bondage." 
The  Constable  de  Montmorency,  writing  (July  24)  to  Lord  Howard,  the 
governor  of  Calais,  promised  that  he  would  himself  conduct  all  the 
forces  at  his  disposal  to  protect  that  town,  should  the  Emperor,  taking 
advantage  of  the  crisis,  seek  to  occupy  it.  But  five  days  later  Noailles 
was  able  to  report  to  the  Duke  of  Orleans  that  troops,  cavalry  and  foot- 
soldiers,  had  rallied  to  Mary's  support  to  the  number  of  between  35,000 
and  40,000  men— all  inspired  with  unprecedented  enthusiasm  and  ask- 
ing for  no  pay,  but  voluntarily  contributing  money,  plate,  and  rings  from 
their  own  slender  resources.  At  Framlingham  there  were  now  to  be 
seen,  besides  Mary's  avowed  supporters,  numerous  nobles  and  gentlemen, 
confessing  their  disloyalty  and  asking  for  pardon.  In  most  cases  these 
petitions  received  a  favourable  response.  Cecil,  who  could  plead  that  he 
had  sip-ned  the  Instrument  of  Succession  under  compulsion,  was  restored 


518  Clemency  of  Mary  [1553 

to  favour  although  not  to  office.  But  the  Dudleys,  both  Robert  and 
Ambrose,  and  about  a  hundred  other  leading  commoners,  among  whom 
was  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt,  remained  for  a  time  under  arrest.  On  July  27 
the  two  Lord  Chief  Justices,  Sir  Roger  Cholmeley  and  Sir  Edward  Mon- 
tagu, were  committed  to  the  Tower,  where,  on  the  following  day,  they 
were  joined  by  the  Duke  of  Suffolk  and  Sir  John  Cheke,  and,  before  the 
end  of  the  month,  by  Northumberland  and  his  Duchess,  with  their  eldest 
son  (the  Earl  of  Warwick),  Guilford  Dudley,  and  the  Lady  Jane. 

On  July  29  Henry  at  Compiegne  signed  the  credentials  of  the  Sieur 
Antoine  de  Noailles  as  ambassador  to  Mary ;  and  two  days  later  it  was 
intimated  to  Nicholas  Wotton,  Pickering,  and  Chaloner  that  the  Queen 
desired  to  retain  them  in  their  posts  as  her  representatives  at  the  French 
Court.  Early  in  August,  Cardinal  Pole,  in  his  monastic  retirement  at 
Maguzzano  on  the  Lago  di  Garda,  received  from  Julius  III  his  appoint- 
ment as  papal  Legate  to  England,  with  instructions  to  visit  both  the 
Imperial  and  the  French  Court  on  his  journey  thither. 

For  the  present  Mary  determined  to  be  guided  mainly  by  the  advice 
of  her  cousin  the  Emperor,  a  decision  the  wisdom  of  which  was  clearl}- 
attested  by  subsequent  events  as  well  as  by  the  letters,  numerous  and 
lengthy,  which  Charles  addressed  to  his  envoys  at  her  Court  in  con- 
nexion with  each  important  question  as  it  arose.  From  the  first  he 
advised  that  the  Queen  should  scrupulously  avoid  appearing  to  set 
herself  in  opposition  to  the  prejudices  and  feelings  of  her  people,  and 
should  above  all  things  endeavour  to  appear  "wwe  honne  Anglaise.^''  It 
was  from  France  alone,  he  considered,  that  she  had  reason  to  apprehend 
much  danger ;  although  Scotland,  as  subservient  to  French  policy,  also 
required  to  be  caref  ull}'  Avatched.  The  French  envoys  had  just  presented 
their  credentials  to  Courtenaj^,  and,  as  a  well-known  sympathiser  with 
the  Italian  Reformers,  he  was  regarded  by  the  Emperor  with  especial 
mistrust.  It  was  rumoured  that  the  young  nobleman  was  making 
advances  to  Elizabeth.  Such  an  alliance,  Charles  pointed  out,  was 
fraught  with  danger  and  must,  if  possible,  be  prevented.  The  Prin- 
cess' attitude  in  relation  to  the  new  doctrines  also  required  to  be  care- 
fully observed.  As  for  the  rebels,  let  exemplary  punishment  be  inflicted 
on  the  leaders,  and  the  rest  be  treated  with  clemency.  The  Lad}^  Jane 
doubtless  deserved  death,  but  it  might  be  well  for  the  present  simply  to 
keep  her  in  close  custody,  where  she  would  be  unable  to  hold  communi- 
cation with  traitors.  Finall}*,  Mary  was  advised  to  get  the  finances  in 
good  order,  so  as  to  have  funds  ready  for  any  emergency,  and,  more 
especially,  to  exercise  a  vigilant  control  over  the  expenditure  of  the 
secret  service  money. 

Counsel  of  a  very  different  nature  came  from  Italy,  where 
Cardinal  Pole's  fervid  enthusiasm  as  a  would-be  reformer  of  religious 
discipline  in  England  Avas  prudently  held  in  check  alike  by  Emperor 
and  Pope.     His  letters  at  this  period,  while  conceived  in  a  spirit  of 


1553]  Action  advocated  hy  Pole  519 

misellisli  devotion  to  the  interests  of  Catholicism,  attest  the  unpractical 
character  of  the  writer  and  the  influences  of  the  monastic  seclusion  in 
whicli  he  had  lately  sought  refuge.  Early  in  August,  Gian  Francesco 
Commendone,  the  papal  chamberlain,  and  Penning,  one  of  Pole's  con- 
fidants, were  sent  expressly,  the  one  from  Brussels,  the  other  from 
Rome,  in  order  more  accurately  to  gauge  both  the  royal  intentions  and 
popular  feeling.  It  was  only  after  considerable  delay  that  they  suc- 
ceeded in  gaining  admission  to  Mary's  presence,  when  her  own  language 
held  out  so  little  hope  of  her  being  able  at  once  to  adopt  a  decisive 
policy  that  Commendone  forthwith  set  out  on  his  return  journey. 
Penning,  however,  remained  until  the  Coronation,  and  was  then  sent 
back  to  Pole  with  a  letter  from  the  Queen.  In  a  letter  to  the  Queen, 
dated  August  13,  the  Cardinal  had  already  enunciated  Iiis  views  of 
Mary's  position  and  responsibilities.  Heresy  was  the  source  of  all  evil ; 
unbridled  passion  had  led  her  father  first  to  divorce  himself  from  his 
wedded  wife,  and  next  to  separate  from  his  mother  the  Church  and  to 
disobey  her  spiritual  Head.  Mary  had  already  reaped  a  reward  for  her 
loyalty  to  the  true  faith  in  her  astonishing  triumph  over  her  rebel 
subjects.  If  ever  the  interposition  of  Divine  Providence  in  human 
affairs  had  been  clearly  apparent,  it  was  in  the  recent  crisis  in  England. 
He  hopes  that  the  character  of  her  rule  will  make  manifest  her  conscious- 
ness of  this  fact,  and  he  is  especiall}^  anxious  to  be  informed  as  to  her 
real  sentiments.  When  once  admitted  to  her  presence,  he  relies  on  being 
able  to  convince  her  that  her  crown  and  the  welfare  of  the  nation  alike 
depend  on  obedience  to  the  Church.  In  her  reply,  Mary  expressed  her 
heartfelt  grief  at  being,  as  yet,  unable  to  disclose  her  secret  wishes,  but 
intimated  that,  as  soon  as  it  was  in  her  power,  she  hoped  to  carry  them 
into  effective  execution.  Pole,  however,  could  see  no  advantage  in 
delay,  holding  that  it  was  especially  desirable  that  he  should  himself 
be  near  at  hand  "to  assist  the  Queen's  good  intentions";  demurring 
at  the  same  time  to  the  proposal  that  the  Pope  should  forthwith 
"  exempt  England  from  every  interdict  and  censure,"  on  the  ground 
that  so  momentous  a  decision  would  more  fitly  be  considered  by  himself 
on  his  arrival. 

All  that  Julius  III  and  the  Emperor  could  do  was  to  contrive  that  a 
counsellor  of  so  much  distinction  and  of  so  small  discretion  should  be  kept 
back  as  long  as  possible  from  the  arena  where  his  influence  was  likely  to 
prove  most  disastrous.  By  the  Pontiff,  Pole  was  designated  legatus  pro 
pace  and  instructed  to  visit  on  his  journey  to  England  both  the  Imperial 
and  the  French  Court,  with  the  view  of  bringing  about,  if  possible, 
an  understanding  between  Charles  and  Henry.  By  the  Emperor,  the 
audience  which  the  Cardinal  asked  for  at  Brussels  was  deferred,  under 
various  pretexts,  until  January,  1554.  As  early  however  as  October  2, 
Pole  had  arrived  at  Trent,  where  we  find  him  writing  to  Courtenay 
and   extolling   the  negative  virtues  which  had  adorned  his  captivity 


520  Position  of  Elizabeth  [i553 

in  the  Tower,  little  surmising  on  what  a  career  his  cousin  had  already 
embarked,  to  the  ruin  alike  of  his  health  and  his  fortunes. 

During  these  critical  days  Elizabeth  had  remained  in  seclusion  at 
Hatfield,  preserving  an  attitude  of  studied  neutrality.  But  on  July  29 
she  entered  London  with  a  large  train  of  followers  and  took  up  her 
residence  at  Somerset  House.  Five  days  later,  the  Queen  made  her 
triumphal  entry  into  the  City  in  the  evening,  and  was  joined  at  Aldgate 
by  her  sister,  the  two  riding  side  by  side  through  the  streets  amid  the 
acclamations  of  the  populace.  Mary,  following  the  usual  practice  of 
ro3^alty  prior  to  coronation,  now  proceeded  to  occupy  the  State  apart- 
ments in  the  Tower.  At  the  Great  Gate,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  Bishop 
Gardiner,  the  Duchess  of  Somerset,  and  the  youthful  Courtenay  awaited 
her  arrival,  all  in  a  kneeling  posture,  and  were  by  her  command  formally 
restored  to  liberty.  Jane,  on  the  other  hand,  found  herself  a  prisoner, 
and  was  consigned  to  the  custody  of  the  new  governor.  Sir  John  Brydges. 
Gardiner  was  sworn  a  member  of  the  Privy  Council,  and,  on  August  23, 
appointed  Lord  High  Chancellor.  On  the  8th  of  the  same  month 
the  funeral  service  for  the  late  King  was  held  in  Westminster  Abbey, 
being  conducted  by  Cranmer  and  according  to  the  Protestant  ritual. 
Mary,  however,  commanded  that  a  requiem  mass  should  also  be  cele- 
brated in  the  Tower,  which  she  strongly  pressed  Elizabeth  to  attend. 
The  Princess  did  not  comply  ;  but  by  her  regular  attendance  at  Court 
gave  evidence  of  her  desire  to  conciliate  her  sister  as  far  as  possible,  and 
six  weeks  later  was  to  be  seen  hearing  mass  in  her  company.  Her 
compliance,  however,  as  Noailles  himself  admits,  was  generally  regarded 
as  dictated  by  fear  rather  than  principle. 

It  soon  how^ever  became  evident  that  the  recognition  of  the  Legate 
and  the  contemplated  resumption  of  relations  with  the  Roman  See  were 
measures  which  would  be  attended  with  far  greater  difficulties  than  the 
restoration  of  the  ancient  worship.  Even  Gardiner,  whose  general 
sympathy  with  such  designs  there  can  be  no  reason  for  doubting,  felt 
himself  bound,  like  the  Emperor,  to  counsel  the  greatest  caution  and 
deliberation.  The  nobles  and  country  gentry,  enriched  by  those  mon- 
astic and  Church  lands  which  they  Avould  be  called  upon  to  restore,  the 
Bishops  whose  deposition  was  regarded  as  imminent,  alike  represented 
vested  interests  which  could  hardly  be  assailed  without  danger.  In 
a  proclamation  issued  August  18,  Mary  announced,  accordingly,  her 
intention  of  deferring  various  questions  of  policy  until  Parliament, 
summoned  to  assemble  on  October  5,  could  be  consulted.  '  But  in  the 
meantime  certain  measures  which  did  hot  appear  to  admit  of  being 
thus  postponed  were  carried  into  effect.  Of  some  sixty  rebels  denounced 
as  traitors  seven  were  convicted  of  high  treason  ;  but  of  these  three  only 
—  Northumberland,  Sir  John  Gates,  and  Sir  Thomas  Palmer  —  actually 
suffered  the  extreme  penalty.  Gardiner  himself  is  said  to  have  inter- 
ceded on  behalf  of  the  Duke,  who,  buoyed  up  by  the  hope  that  the 


1553]  Mary's  Church  policy  521 

royal  clemency  would  be  extended  to  him  on  the  scaffold  itself,  there 
acknowledged  the  justice  of  his  sentence  and  made  a  complete  renunci- 
ation of  Protestantism,  even  going-  so  far  as  to  attribute  the  intestine 
strife  and  the  miseries,  which  for  so  many  years  had  troubled  alike 
England  and  Germany,  to  the  defection  of  those  realms  from  the  true 
faith.  The  Roman  ritual  was  not  as  yet  formally  restored  as  obligatory 
on  all  loyal  subjects,  but  in  her  private  chapel  ]\lary  heard  mass.  The 
Protestant  Bishops  were  deposed  ;  and  an  injunction  was  issued  that  none 
of  the  clergy  should  preach  without  the  royal  licence,  while  any  member 
of  that  body  was  to  be  liable  to  suspension  if  his  conduct  proved  un- 
satisfactory. Gardiner,  Bonner,  Heath,  and  Day  were  reinstated  in 
their  respective  sees  of  Winchester,  London,  Worcester,  and  Chichester. 
The  see  of  Durham,  which  Northumberland  had  suppressed,  appropri- 
ating its  ample  revenues  to  his  own  use,  was  restored,  and  Cuthbert 
Tunstall  installed  as  Bishop.  On  August  29  Gardiner  received  in- 
structions himself  to  select  and  appoint  capable  preachers  who  were  to 
be  sent  to  disci jarge  their  functions  throughout  the  country. 

Not  a  few  of  the  more  eminent  preachers  among  the  Reformers, 
foreseeing  the  storm,  had  already  fled  to  the  Continent  ;  but  a  certain 
number  still  remained,  such  as  Latimer  and  Jolni  Bradford,  openly 
to  call  in  question  the  prerogatives  which  the  Queen  still  arrogated  to 
herself  as  Head  of  the  Church.  Foremost,  however,  among  those  wlio 
refused  to  flee  was  Archbishop  Cranmer,  who  at  his  palace  in  Lambeth 
confronted  the  reactionary  tendencies  around  him  with  an  intrepidity 
which  marked  him  out  for  general  observation.  Alread}^  obnoxious, 
owing  to  his  complicit}^  in  the  diversion  of  the  Succession  to  the  Crown, 
he  was  by  his  open  denunciation  of  the  restoration  of  the  INIass,  which  he 
declared  to  involve  "  many  horrible  blasphemies,"  exposed  to  the  charge 
of  open  resistance  to  the  royal  authority.  On  September  8  he  was 
summoned  before  the  Council  to  answer  for  the  publication  of  the 
Declaration  in  which  he  had  given  expression  to  his  views.  His  defence, 
if  such  it  could  be  termed,  was  rightly  regarded  as  evasive.  He  pleaded 
that  Scory,  the  deprived  Bishop  of  Chichester,  had  published  the  De- 
claration without  his  formal  authorisation,  though  he  admitted  that  it 
had  been  his  intention  to  give  it.  He  was  accordingly  committed  to 
the  Tower,  where  Ridley,  who  had  publicly  proclaimed  the  illegitimacy 
of  both  Mary  and  Elizabeth,  had  already  been  a  prisoner  for  two 
months.  Latimer's  committal  appears  to  have  taken  place  about  the 
same  time  ;  and,  early  in  October,  Cranmer  was  followed  by  his  brother 
Primate,  Arclibishop  Holgate.  The  latter  Avas  now  more  than  seventy 
years  of  age,  and  chiefly  obnoxious  on  account  of  the  persistent  energy 
with  which  he  assailed  all  that  reflected  the  Roman  ritual  and  orna- 
mentation in  the  churches. 

On  October  1  Mary  was  crowned  in  Westminster  Al:»bey — the 
procession  from  the  Tower  and  the  entire  ceremonial  being  marked  by 


522  Her  first  Parliament  [i553 

much  splendour  and  by  a  revival  of  all  the  features  and  details  which 
belonged  to  such  ceremonies  in  medieval  times.  The  whole  Court  also 
now  resumed  the  brilliant  attire  and  costly  adornments  of  the  reign 
of  Henry  VIII.  On  the  5th  of  tlie  month  Mary's  first  Parliament 
assembled.  The  Council,  out  of  deference  to  the  royal  wishes,  had 
contemplated  measures  which  would  have  reversed  all  the  anti-papal 
enactments  of  both  the  preceding  reigns.  But  here  the  Commons  assumed 
a  decisive  attitude  ;  and  it  Avas  eventually  determined  that  the  question 
of  restoring  the  lands  and  other  j)roperty,  which  had  been  wrested  from 
the  Clmrch  and  the  suppressed  monasteries,  should  not  be  considered, 
and  that,  with  respect  to  the  supremacy  in  matters  of  religion,  legislation 
should  go  back  no  further  than  to  the  commencement  of  Edward's  reign. 
Whatever  appeared  to  favour  papal  authority  was,  as  Mary  in  a  letter 
to  Pole  herself  admitted,  regarded  with  suspicion.  On  the  other  hand, 
much  was  done  to  propitiate  the  new  sovereign.  A  bill  was  at  once 
brought  in  legalising  the  marriage  of  Catharine  of  Aragon  and  abolishing 
all  disabilities  attaching  to  the  profession  of  the  old  faith.  The  oppo- 
sition of  the  Protestant  party  in  the  House  caused  a  certain  delay  ;  but 
after  an  interval  of  three  days  the  ministers  brought  in  two  bills  :  the 
one  affirming  the  legality  of  Catharine's  marriage  without  adverting  to 
the  papal  decision  ;  the  other  rescinding  the  legislation  affecting  religious 
worship  and  the  Church  during  the  reign  of  the  late  King.  The 
retrospective  force  of  the  latter  bill  went,  however,  no  further  —  the 
ecclesiastical  supremacy  of  the  Crown  being  still  tacitly  admitted.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  it  involved  the  renunciation  of  the  chief  results  of 
Cranmer's  efforts  during  the  preceding  reign — the  Reformed  Liturgy,  the 
First  and  Second  Books  of  Common  Prayer,  the  administration  of  the 
Sacrament  in  both  kinds,  and  the  recognition  of  a  married  clergy  — and 
was  consequently  not  allowed  to  pass  without  considerable  opposition. 
But  its  opponents,  although  representing  nearly  a  third  of  the  Lower 
House,  did  not  deem  it  prudent  to  press  the  question  to  a  division,  and 
in  the  Upper  House  no  resistance  was  offered. 

It  was  manifest  that  conclusions  so  incompatible — the  recognition  of 
I\Iary  as  Head  of  the  Church  in  England  and  the  tacit  assumption  of 
the  Papal  Supremacy  —  represented  a  temporising  policy  which  was  not 
likely  to  secure  the  permanent  support  of  either  party.  Cardinal  Pole 
declared  himself  profoundly  dissatisfied  :  the  Divine  favour  had  recently 
been  cons})icuously  shown  in  that  outburst  of  loyal  feeling  which  had 
secured  Mary's  succession,  and  sovereign  and  people  alike  were  bound  b)^ 
gratitude  forthwith  to  seek  reconciliation  with  the  Holy  See  and  to 
afford  its  Legate  an  honourable  reception.  The  Emperor  and  Gardiner, 
on  the  other  liand,  still  counselled  caution,  and  more  especially  patience 
in  awaiting  the  results  of  a  gradual  re-establishment  of  that  Roman 
ritual  which  early  association  and  religious  sentiment  endeared  to  the 
liearts  of  a  majority  of  the  population.     In  common  with  many  of  her 


1553]  The  suitors  for  Mary's  hand  523 

subjects,  the  Queen  herself  firmly  believed  that  nothing  would  more 
effectually  contribute  to  the  desired  end  than  the  prospect  of  a  Catholic 
heir  to  the  throne  ;  and,  althougli  in  her  tlurt3'-seventli  year  and  in 
infirm  health,  she  consequently  regarded  her  own  marriage  as  a  dut}-  to 
the  State.  But  even  if  personal  predilection  was  to  be  sacrificed  on  the 
altar  of  duty,  her  choice  of  a  husband  was  a  matter  involving  anxious 
consideration  amid  the  conflicting  claims  of  the  national  welfare  and  of 
the  Catholic  faith.  In  its  broadest  phase,  the  question  lay  between  a 
native  of  her  own  country  and  a  foreigner.  The  nation  undoubtedly 
wished  to  see  her  married  to  one  of  her  own  nobles  ;  it  is  equally  certain 
that  Mary's  devout  attachment  to  the  interests  of  the  Roman  Church 
inclined  her  to  look  abroad.  In  the  course  of  the  year  following  upon 
her  accession  report  singled  out  three  supposed  claimants  for  her  hand, 
of  whom  one  was  sixteen  years  her  senior,  the  other  two  each  about 
ten  years  her  junior. 

There  is  no  evidence  that  Reginald  Pole  ever  aspired  to  marry 
Mary,  or  that  she,  in  turn,  ever  regarded  him  in  any  other  light  than 
that  of  a  much  valued  friend  and  counsellor.  The  personal  graces  and 
touching  experiences  of  Edward  Courtenay  might  well  recommend  liim 
to  a  woman's  sympathies.  He  was  the  son  of  Edward  Courtenay, 
Marquis  of  Exeter,  who  had  been  executed  in  1539  for  his  share  in  the 
conspiracy  in  favour  of  Reginald  Pole,  and  was  thus  the  great-grandson  of 
Edward  IV.  Mary  herself  had  just  freed  him  from  an  imprisonment  of 
nearly  fifteen  years  and  had  created  him  Earl  of  Devonshire,  while  at 
her  coronation  he  was  selected  to  bear  the  sword  before  her.  His 
mother,  the  Marchioness  of  Exeter,  one  of  Mary's  dearest  friends,  was 
now  one  of  her  ladies  in  waiting.  His  long  isolation  from  society  and 
neglected  education  had  however  ill  qualified  him  to  play  a  part  in 
politics,  while  the  fascinations  which  surrounded  him  in  his  newly 
acquired  freedom  proved  too  potent  for  his  self-control,  and  his  wild 
debaucheries  became  the  scandal  of  the  capital.  Whatever  influence 
Pole  might  have  been  able  to  exert  would  probably  have  favoured 
Courtenay's  claims.  As  a  boy,  both  he  and  his  brother  Geofl'rey  had 
received  much  kindness  from  the  Marquis  of  Exeter,  the  young  Earl's 
father  —  favours  which  Geoffrey  had  ill  repaid  by  bearing  evidence  which 
brought  the  Marquis  to  the  scaffold  — and  Pole's  own  mother,  the 
Countess  of  Salisbury,  prior  to  her  tragic  execution,  had  shared  the 
captivity  of  the  Marchioness.  But  Courtenay's  indiscretions  soon 
rendered  the  efforts  of  his  best  friends  nugatory.  It  now  became 
known  that  his  conduct  had  completely  lost  him  Mary's  favour,  and 
he  was  next  heard  of  as  conspiring  against  his  would-be  benefactress. 

To  a  fairly  impartial  observer  it  might  well  have  seemed  that  the 
arguments  for  and  against  the  Spanish  marriage  were  of  nearly  equal 
force.  Certain  political  advantages  were  obvious,  and  as  Renard  pointed 
out  to  the  Queen  herself  it  would  afford  the  necessary  counterbalance 


524  Courtenaij  and  Pliillp  [1553 

to  the  matrimonial  alliance  which  already  existed  between  France 
and  Scotland;  while  the  national  antipathy  to  Spaniards,  having  its 
origin  in  commercial  rivalry,  could  hardly  be  supposed  to  extend  to  a 
great  prince  like  Philip.  On  the  other  hand  it  would  be  necessary  to 
obtain  the  papal  dispensation ;  for  Mary  and  Philip  were  within  the 
degrees  of  consanguinity  forbidden  by  the  Canon  Law.  There  also 
appeared  to  be  considerable  danger  as  regarded  the  Succession ;  for  if 
j\Iary  died  without  issue,  as  seemed  highly  probable,  it  was  difficult  to 
foresee  what  claims  her  husband  might  not  advance.  Such  were  the 
circumstances  in  which  Gardiner,  who  had  formed  a  regard  for  Courtenay 
when  they  were  prisoners  together,  had,  in  the  first  instance,  suggested 
that  the  Queen  should  marr}^  the  young  English  noble,  and  that  Elizabeth 
should  be  excluded  from  the  Succession;  while  Paget,  who  had  just 
received  back  his  Garter,  thought  it  best  that  Mary's  choice  should  be 
left  free,  but  that  she  should  recognise  Elizabeth  as  her  presumptive 
successor.  The  great  majority  of  the  nobles  and  gentr}^  whether  Catholic 
or  Protestant,  were  divided  and  perplexed  by  the  opposing  considera- 
tions of  the  danger  of  a  foreign  yoke,  the  hope  of  seeing  an  hereditary 
faith  restored,  and  the  necessity  which  might  yet  ensue  of  being  called 
upon  to  surrender  those  former  possessions  of  the  Church  v/hich  con- 
stituted, in  many  cases,  the  present  holder's  chief  wealth. 

A  selection  whicii  would  draw  closer  the  ties  between  England  and 
Spain  was  naturally  regarded  with  jealousy  by  the  French  monarch,  and 
Noailles  was  instructed  to  use  every  eifort  to  avert  it.  He  accordingly 
plied  his  arguments  and  persuasions  with  untiring  assiduity  in  every 
direction,  and  so  far  succeeded  that  the  Commons  were  prevailed  upon 
to  vote  an  Address  to  the  Crown,  in  which,  while  urging  upon  Mary 
the  desirability  of  marriage,  they  also  advised  that  her  choice  should 
be  restricted  to  the  peerage  of  her  own  realm.  A  week  later  Renard 
had  an  audience  of  the  Queen,  at  which  he  made  the  offer  from  Charles 
himself  of  Philip's  hand.  Mary  had  previously  made  careful  enquiry  of 
the  ambassador  himself  respecting  the  Prince's  habits  and  natural  dis- 
position, and,  after  a  short  time  had  been  allowed  to  elapse  for  apparent 
deliberation,  intimated  her  acceptance  of  the  offer. 

Such  were  the  circumstances  in  which,  on  November  17,  the  Commons 
presented  the  above-mentioned  Address.  The  customary  mode  of  pro- 
cedure required  that  Gardiner,  as  Chancellor,  should  be  tlie  royal 
mouthpiece  in  reply.  But  Mary,  rising  from  her  throne,  herself  gave 
answer,  and  did  so,  if  we  may  credit  Renard,  in  terms  of  some  asperity, 
repudiating  the  right  of  the  Commons  to  control  her  decision,  and 
declaring  that  Elizabeth,  who  was  illegitimate,  should  never  be  her 
successor.  Early  in  December  it  was  rumoured  that  Courtenay  was 
making  advances  to  Elizabeth,  and  that  Noailles  was  playing  the  part 
of  go-between.  Elizabeth,  accordingly^  deemed  it  prudent  to  request 
her  sister's  permission  to  retire  to  her  seat  at  Ashridge  in  Hertfordshire  ; 


1554]  The  marriage  treaty  loith  Philip  525 

and  her  application  was  granted  by  Mary  with  every  demonstration  of 
cordial  affection. 

The  triumph  of  the  imperialist  party  seemed  complete  ;  and  Noailles 
was  fain  to  report  to  Henry  that  j\Iary  seemed  more  Spanish  than  English 
in  her  sympathies.  The  Chancellor  himself,  now  that  Courtenay 's  chances 
appeared  to  be  at  an  end,  came  forward  as  a  supporter  of  the  match  witli 
Spain,  and  proceeded  to  take  a  foremost  part  in  the  negotiations  with 
respect  to  the  various  questions,  direct  and  collateral,  which  such  an 
alliance  involved  —  the  marriage  treaty  itself,  the  provisions  in  case  of 
issue,  and  those  in  case  of  failure.  On  January  2, 1554,  Count  Egmont 
and  other  plenipotentiaries  appeared  in  London,  duly  empowered  to  make 
the  final  arrangements.  Courtenay  himself  gave  them  official  welcome  at 
Tower  Hill,  and  conducted  them  to  Westminster.  On  the  14th  Gardiner 
read  aloud  in  the  presence  chamber  the  articles  which  had  been  agreed 
upon,  and  pointed  out  the  political  advantages  which  would  result  from 
such  an  alliance.  The  articles,  originally  extending  over  thirteen  pages, 
had  been  expanded  to  twenty-two,  and  represented  the  labours  of  ten 
commissioners — those  co-operating  with  Renard,the  Counts  Egmont  and 
Lalaing,  de  Courrieres,  and  Philip  Nigri  ;  those  appointed  by  the  Queen, 
Gardiner,  Arundel,  Paget,  Sir  Robert  Rochester,  and  Petre.  As  finally 
agreed  upon,  the  treaty  must  be  held  highly  creditable  to  Gardiner's 
sagacity  and  ability  ;  and  when,  eighteen  years  afterwards,  the  marriage 
of  Elizabeth  with  the  Duke  of  Anjou  was  in  contemplation,  it  served  as 
the  model  for  that  which  was  then  to  be  drawn  up.  It  has  however 
been  pointed  out  as  a  somewhat  suspicious  feature  that  the  concessions 
were  all  on  the  imperial  side.  If,  indeed,  treaties  could  bind,  Pliilip 
stood  hand-tied  in  his  relations  to  England.  While  nominally  sharing 
the  government  with  the  Queen,  he  was  pledged  scrupulously  to  respect 
the  laws,  privileges,  and  customs  of  the  realm  ;  he  was  to  settle  on  her  a 
jointure  of  X 60,000  ;  their  offspring  were  to  succeed  them  in  England  in 
conformity  with  the  traditional  rights,  and  might  also  succeed  to  the 
territories  in  Burgundy  and  Flanders  ;  and,  in  the  event  of  Philip's  son, 
Don  Carlos,  dying  without  issue,  this  right  of  succession  was  to  extend 
to  Spain,  Milan,  and  the  Two  Sicilies.  Should  Mary's  marriage  be 
unfruitful,  Philip's  connexion  with  England  was  to  cease  at  her  death. 
Under  no  pretext  was  England  to  be  made  participant  in  the  war 
between  the  Emperor  and  France. 

In  the  meantime  Cardinal  Pole's  arrival  in  Brussels  had  been  retarded 
by  a  long  and  involuntary  stay  at  the  university  town  of  Dillingen,  the 
residence  of  the  Bishop  of  Augsburg  ;  while  his  endeavours  to  carry  on 
his  correspondence  with  Mary  had  been  frustrated,  their  messengers 
having  been  stopped  on  each  side  of  the  Channel.  It  was  with  difficulty 
that  she  had  conveyed  to  him  the  simple  intimation  that,  as  matters 
then  stood,  his  appearance  in  England  as  the  legate  of  the  Holy  See 
might  prove  disastrous  to  the  cause  which  they  both  had  nearest  at 


52G  Conspiracies  among  the  malcontents  [i554 

heart.  But  at  length,  making  his  way  with  nervous  haste  through  the 
phigue-smitten  towns  of  Germany,  he  was  able,  through  the  good  offices  of 
Fray  de  Soto,  who  held  a  chair  of  divinity  at  Dillingen,  to  present  himself 
at  the  imperial  Court,  where  he  arrived  in  January,  1554  ;  and  Mary's 
marriage  with  Philip  being  by  this  time  virtuall}'^  decided,  his  reception 
was  both  cordial  and  splendid.  The  assurances  which  he  received  from 
Charles  and  his  ministers  were  indeed  so  flattering,  that  he  even  ventured 
to  hope  that  his  mission  as  a  peace-maker  might  yet  be  crowned  with 
success.  But,  long  before  the  Cardinal  could  present  himself  at  the 
French  Court,  a  fresh  crisis  had  supervened  in  England. 

Here  the  belief  was  fast  gaining  ground  that  the  realm  was  destined 
to  become  a  dependency  of  Spain  ;  while  in  France  it  was  no  less  firmly 
believed  that  Philip's  marriage  would  be  made  the  opportunity  for  the 
subjugation  of  Scotland.  Henry,  placing  no  reliance  on  Mary's  pacific 
assurances,  deemed  it  advisable  to  send  troops  into  that  country,  while 
Wotton,  convinced  that  war  was  imminent,  petitioned  to  be  recalled. 
That  Elizabeth  should  marry  Courtenay  and  supplant  her  sister  on  the 
throne,  now  seemed  to  be  the  issue  most  favourable  to  French  interests  ; 
and  while  Henry's  ambassadors  at  the  English  Court  did  their  best  to 
foment  the  growing  suspicion  of  Spain,  the  monarch  himself  strove  to 
spread  the  rumour  of  a  fresh  rising  in  England.  Writing  to  his  envoy 
in  Venice,  he  gave  him  the  earliest  intelligence  of  a  rising  in  Kent  ; 
and  on  February  18  Peter  Vannes,  writing  to  Mary,  enclosed  a  copy 
of  Henry's  letter  :  according  to  the  intelligence  he  had  received  from 
Noailles,  Henry  added,  it  was  almost  certain  that  all  England  would 
imitate  the  example  thus  set  and  "  prefer  to  die  in  battle  rather  than 
become  subject  to  a  foreign  Prince."  As  early  as  Christmas,  the  con- 
spirators, assembling  in  London,  had  concerted  a  general  rising,  which, 
however,  was  not  to  take  place  until  March  18. 

Their  plans,  however,  had  been  suspected ;  and  Gardiner,  having 
wrung  from  the  weak  and  faithless  Courtenay  a  full  confession  of  the 
plot,  had  taken  prompt  measures  for  its  repression.  The  ringleaders, 
who  were  thus  anticipated  in  their  designs  nearly  two  months  before 
the  time  agreed  upon  for  carrying  them  into  execution,  flew  recklessly 
to  arms.  Suffolk  and  Sir  James  Croft,  each  seeking  to  raise  his 
tenantry  —  the  one  in  Warwickshire,  the  other  in  Wales  —  were  both 
arrested  and  consigned  to  the  Tower  before  the  second  week  in 
February  had  passed.  In  Devonshire,  towards  the  close  of  January, 
local  feeling  appears  to  have  led  a  certain  number  of  the  gentry  to  make 
a  demonstration  in  Courtenay's  favour,  Sir  Peter  Carew,  who  had  been 
sheriff  of  the  county,  being  foremost  among  them.  His  family,  however, 
were  unpopular  and  commanded  but  little  influence,  and  the  other 
leaders,  after  vainly  awaiting  Courtenay's  promised  appearance  at 
Exeter,  suddenly  dispersed  in  panic.  Carew  fled  to  Paris  and  thence  to 
Venice,  where  his  adventurous  and  turbulent  career  was  nearly  brought 


1554]  TJie  rlsuKj  ui  Kent  527 

to  a  conclusion  by  bravos  whom  Peter  Vannes  was  accused  of  having 
hired  to  assassinate  him. 

The  chief  danger  arose  in  Kent,  where  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt,  a  bold 
and  skilful  leader,  succeeded  in  collecting  a  considerable  force  at 
Rochester,  which  was  shortly  after  augmented  by  2000  men  wlio  had 
deserted  from  the  standard  of  Lord  Abergavenny  near  Wrotham  Heath. 
This  gathering  was  the  response  to  a  proclamation  which  he  had 
previously  (January  25)  issued  at  Maidstone,  in  which  Mary's  supporters 
were  denounced  as  aiming  at  the  perpetual  servitude  of  her  most 
loving  subjects.  Englishmen  were  adjured  to  rise  in  defence  of  liberty 
and  the  commonwealth,  while  intimation  was  given  that  aid  was  on 
its  way  from  France.  With  Noailles  Wyatt  appears  actually  to  have 
been  in  correspondence.  The  Council  were  divided  as  to  the  course 
which  should  be  pursued  and  distracted  by  mutual  recriminations  ;  while 
they  also  evinced  no  alacrity  in  taking  measures  for  the  raising  of  troops. 
Mary,  whom  Renard  dissuaded  from  quitting  the  capital,  exhibited  on 
the  other  hand  a  courage  and  resolution  which  roused  the  loyal  feeling 
of  all  around  her.  While  part  of  the  City  Guard  at  once  set  out  to 
meet  the  insurgents,  the  Corporation  proceeded  to  arm  an  additional 
force  of  500  men  to  follow  in  their  track.  As  they  approached  Rochester 
Bridge,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  by  whom  they  were  commanded,  sent 
forward  a  herald  to  proclaim  that  "  all  such  as  wolde  desyst  their 
purpose  shuld  have  frank  and  free  pardon."  On  February  1  the  Queen 
herself  appeared  at  a  gathering  of  the  citizens  in  the  Guildhall  and 
delivered  a  speech  which  excited  general  enthusiasm.  Wyatt,  she  said, 
had  demanded  to  be  entrusted  with  the  care  of  her  person,  the  keeping 
of  the  Tower,  and  the  placing  of  her  counsellors ;  she  was  convinced  that 
her  loyal  subjects  would  never  consent  that  such  confidence  should  be 
placed  in  so  vile  a  traitor.  As  for  her  marriage,  the  conspirators  were 
simply  making  it  "  a  Spanish  cloak  to  cover  their  pretended  purpose 
against  our  religion."  The  Council  had  pronounced  her  marriage  ex- 
pedient "both  for  the  wealth  of  the  realm  and  also  of  you,  our  subjects"  ; 
should  the  nobility  and  the  Commons  deem  it  otherwise,  she  was  willing 
"to  abstain  from  marriage  while  she  lived."  Her  courage  and  out- 
spokenness produced  a  considerable  effect  ;  for  two  days  later  Noailles 
sent  word  that  the  populace,  who  had  been  reported  to  be  meditating 
an  attack  on  the  palace  and  the  consignment  of  Mary  herself  into 
Wyatt's  hands,  were  actively  occupied  with  putting  the  City  into  a  state 
of  defence  and  had  mustered  to  the  number  of  25,000  armed  men. 
To  whoever  should  succeed  in  making  Wyatt  a  prisoner  and  bringing 
him  before  the  Council,  a  reward  of  an  annuity  of  one  hundred  pounds 
was  held  out,  payable  in  perpetuity  to  himself  and  his  descendants. 

At  this  juncture  Wyatt  appeared  in  Southwark,  but  his  army 
amounted  only  to  some  7000  men  ;  no  force  had  arrived  from  France, 
while    the    royal    army   was    daily   receiving    reinforcements.       The 


528  Execution  of  the  chief  conspirators  [i554 

contemporaiy  chronicler  has  described  in  graphic  narrative  the  incidents 
of  the  final  episode  :—Wyatt's  arrival  at  Hyde  Park  Corner  ;  the  fierce 
fighting  that  ensued  as  he  pressed  on  to  the  City  ;  the  flight  of  the 
cowardly  Courtenay ;  Lord  Howard's  resolute  refusal  to  open  Lud  Gate  ; 
Wyatt's  consequent  retreat  in  the  direction  of  Charing  Cross,  and 
surrender  at  Temple  Bar.  The  number  of  those  slain  in  the  fighting 
was  about  forty  ;  fifty  of  the  conspirators  were  afterwards  hanged,  the 
rest  were  allowed  to  betake  themselves  to  their  homes. 

Mary's  former  clemency  had  been  censured  by  Charles  ;  and  the 
Queen  herself,  justifiably  incensed  at  the  manner  in  which  that  clemency 
had  been  requited,  was  determined  not  to  err  again  in  the  same  direction. 
Gardiner,  preaching  in  her  presence  on  February  11,  exhorted  her 
now  to  have  mercy  on  the  commonwealth,  "  the  conservation  of  which 
required  that  hurtful  members  should  be  cut  off."  On  the  following  day 
the  tragedy  of  the  execution  of  the  Lady  Jane  and  Lord  Guilford  Dudley 
took  place  on  Tower  Hill.  Of  Suffolk's  duplicity  and  entire  want  of 
good  faith  there  could  be  no  doubt,  while  his  known  sympathy  with  the 
Continental  Reformers  filled  up  the  measure  of  his  offence  ;  and  his 
execution  followed  about  a  week  later.  Wyatt  and  Suffolk's  wealthy 
and  ambitious  brother,  Lord  Thomas  Grey,  suffered  the  same  fate  in  the 
following  April.  On  the  same  day  that  the  executions  commenced  Courte- 
nay again  found  himself  a  prisoner  in  the  Tower ;  here  he  was  confronted 
with  Wyatt,  who  directly  accused  him  of  complicity  in  the  rebellion, 
and  for  a  time  his  fate  seemed  doubtful.  A  few  weeks  later,  however,  he 
was  removed  to  Fotheringay ;  and  a  year  after  he  was  released  on  parole, 
on  condition  that  he  quitted  the  kingdom,  when  he  selected  Padua  as 
the  place  of  his  retirement.  The  last  of  the  rebels  to  suffer  was  William 
Thomas,  Clerk  of  the  Council  under  Edward  VI,  whose  execution  took 
place  on  May  18.  According  to  the  statement  of  Wyatt  in  his  confes- 
sion before  the  Commission,  Thomas  had  been  the  first  to  suggest  the 
assassination  of  Mary.  In  the  Tower  he  attempted  suicide  ;  and  no 
detail  of  ignominy  was  omitted  at  his  execution. 

From  each  victim  an  endeavour  was  made  to  extort  evidence  which 
might  assist  the  authorities  in  tracing  the  conspiracy  to  its  suspected 
origin,  and  the  investigations  were  consequently  lengthened.  Charles, 
although  he  still  counselled  caution  and  deliberation  in  dealing  with 
matters  of  religion,  urged  promptitude  in  the  punishment  of  the  con- 
spirators, so  that  Mary,  "  while  taking  such  measures  as  seemed  requisite 
for  her  own  security  in  regard  to  Elizabeth  and  Courtenay,"  might  the 
sooner  be  able  to  exercise  clemency  towards  those  whom  she  designed  to 
spare,  and  thus  reassure  the  great  majority.  The  Emperor,  indeed,  found 
her  procrastination  so  inexplicable  that  he  was  inclined  to  attribute  it 
to  a  desire  on  the  part  of  Gardiner  to  protect  Courtenay.  At  the 
commencement  of  the  outbreak  Mary  had  summoned  Elizabeth  back 
to  Court,  where  a  closer  surveillance  could    be  maintained  over   her 


1554]  Elizabeth,  Michiel,  and  Pole  529 

movements.  The  Princess  deferred  compliance  under  the  plea  of  illness  ; 
but  on  February  22  she  arrived  in  a  litter  at  St  James'.  Here  she 
remained,  a  virtual  prisoner,  until  March  18,  when  the  order  was  given 
for  her  removal  to  the  Tower.  Thence,  on  May  18,  she  was  removed 
to  Woodstock,  where  she  continued  to  reside  until  the  following*  April, 
under  the  custody  of  Sir  Henry  Bedingfield,  closely  watched  and  deprived 
of  v>^riting  materials,  but  allowed  to  have  service  performed  according 
to  the  English  ritual.  After  the  conspiracy  had  been  crushed  Charles 
strongly  urged  that  the  Princess  should  be  executed,  on  the  ground  of 
her  connivance  at  Wyatt's  plans.  Wyatt  himself,  indeed,  in  his  last 
words  on  the  scaffold,  completely  and  emphatically  exonerated  her.  It 
was  asserted,  however,  that  there  was  documentary  evidence  of  her  guilt, 
but  that  it  was  destroyed  by  Gardiner,  to  whose  exertions  she  was,  at 
this  crisis,  probably  indebted  for  her  life. 

The  gain  to  the  imperial  power  which  would  accrue  from  the  marriage 
between  Mary  and  Philip  had  been  regarded  by  Venice  with  an  appre- 
hension scarcely  less  than  that  of  France  ;  and  it  was  an  ascertained  fact 
that  a  Venetian  carrack,  anchored  at  the  mouth  of  the  Thames,  had 
supplied  Wyatt  with  arms  and  a  cannon.  Suspicion  fell  upon  Soranzo  ; 
but  on  being  interrogated  before  the  Council  he  stoutly  denied  all  know- 
ledge of  the  transaction,  although  complaints  against  him  continued  to 
be  urged,  and  the  charge  itself  was  formally  preferred  by  Vargas  in 
Venice.  On  March  27,  accordingly,  Soranzo's  letters  of  recall  were 
drawn  up,  and  Giovanni  Michiel  was  appointed  his  successor.  On 
May  22  the  latter  arrived  in  England.  It  probably  attests  his  im- 
partiality in  the  discharge  of  his  functions  that,  both  by  Renard  and 
Noailles,  he  was  subsequently  reproached  as  favouring  the  opposite  party. 
He  appears  in  reality  to  have  conducted  himself  throughout  with  dis- 
cretion and  probity  ;  and,  while  gaining  the  esteem  of  the  most  discern- 
ing judges  with  whom  he  came  in  contact  in  England,  he  continued  to 
command  the  undiminished  confidence  of  the  Venetian  Council. 

In  March,  Pole  had  arrived  at  St  Denis,  and  shortly  after  had  an 
audience  of  the  King,  by  whom  he  was  received  with  marked  cordiality. 
The  question  of  Mary's  marriage  was  naturally  one  on  which  the  expres- 
sion of  his  views  was  invited  ;  and  he  was  unable  to  conceal  his  personal 
conviction  that,  Courtenay's  political  career  having  now  terminated,  it 
would  be  better  that  the  Queen  of  England  should  remain  unmarried. 
In  any  case,  he  admitted  that  her  marriage  with  Philip  appeared  to  him 
undesirable.  That  such  was  his  opinion  soon  became  known  at  the 
imperial  Court  ;  and,  on  his  return  to  Brussels  in  April,  he  not  only 
received  a  sharp  rebuke  from  the  Emperor,  but  shortly  after  learned  that 
Charles  had  urged  in  Rome  the  desirability  of  his  recall.  He  continued, 
however,  to  reside  in  the  monastery  of  Dili  gam,  near  Brussels  ;  for  Pope 
Julius  could  not  but  feel  that  his  presence  as  Legate  in  England  would 
soon  be  indispensable.     But  for  the  present  the  fact  that  his  attainder 

C.    M.    H.    II.  34 


530  Mary^s  second  Parliament  [1554 

by  Parliament  was  still  unreversed,  and  the  evident  expediency  of 
reassuring  those  who  now  held  the  alienated  Church  lands  as  to  his 
intentions  with  regard  to  their  restitution,  sufficed  to  justify  a  slight 
further  delay. 

In  the  meantime,  the  reaction  which  ensued  after  the  insurrection  had 
been  suppressed  had  enabled  Mary  to  make  known  her  policy,  and  to 
carry  it  into  effect  with  less  reserve.  In  March,  Egmont  returned  from 
Brussels,  and  in  his  presence  and  that  of  the  Earl  of  Pembroke  the 
Queen  formally  betrothed  herself  to  Philip.  Every  effort  was  now  made 
to  diffuse  throughout  the  country  the  belief  that  the  marriage  would 
prove  conducive  to  the  stability  of  the  realm  and  to  the  increase  of  its 
prestige.  Wotton,  writing  to  Noailles  from  Paris,  pointed  out,  at  some 
length,  that  the  involved  alliance  with  Spain  was  England's  indispensable 
rejoinder  to  the  danger  which  menaced  her  through  the  conjunction  of 
France  with  Scotland  ;  while  he  further  maintained  that  it  was  as  a 
means  of  defence  against  this  ominous  combination  that  Charles  desired 
to  bring  about  a  union  between  England  and  Flanders,  between  the 
House  of  Tudor  and  that  of  Habsburg  ;  as  for  the  intention  with  which 
France  credited  him,  —  the  subjugation  of  the  country  and  the  disarming 
of  its  population,  —  such  designs  had  no  place  in  the  imperial  breast.  In 
support  of  these  views  he  adduced  the  fact  that  large  numbers  of  the 
English  malcontents  were  daily  arriving  in  France,  seeking  service  under 
Henry,  "in  order  to  carry  on  the  war  against  the  Emperor  by  sea." 

The  assembling  of  Mary's  second  Parliament  (April  2,  1554)  at 
Westminster  also  served,  from  the  contrast  it  presented  to  its  prede- 
cessor, to  emphasise  a  new  departure  in  public  affairs.  Not  more  than 
seventy  of  the  members  of  the  former  House  reappeared  in  the  new  ; 
and  the  entire  body  evinced  a  spirit  of  far  more  ready  compliance  with 
the  royal  wishes.  The  leading  members  accepted  gratefully  the  pensions 
which  Mary,  aided  by  the  imperial  liberality,  Avas  able  to  offer  them  ; 
and  the  marriage  bill,  as  it  came  down  from  the  Upper  House,  received 
a  ready  assent.  The  necessity  for  discussion,  indeed,  was  diminished  b}^ 
the  fact  that  the  conditions  already  agreed  upon  between  Charles  and 
Gardiner  were  now  restated  with  explanatory  clauses  to  obviate  mis- 
interpretation. It  was  also  expressly  stipulated  that  the  royal  match 
should  not  in  any  way  "  derogate  from  the  league  recently  concluded 
between  the  Queen  and  the  King  of  France,  but  that  the  peace  between 
the  English  and  the  French  should  remain  firm  and  inviolate."  Some 
opposition  was  offered,  however,  to  the  proposal  to  repeal  the  two  Acts 
for  the  dissolution  of  the  bishopric  of  Durham,  the  measure  being  carried 
by  a  majority  of  only  81  in  a  House  of  321. 

Her  main  objects  thus  attained,  Mary  dismissed  Parliament  on  May  5  ; 
and  for  the  next  two  months  her  energies  and  attention  were  mainly 
concentrated  on  the  preparations  for  the  reception  of  Philip,  who  arrived 
from  Corunna  in  Southampton  Water  on  July  20.     He  was  escorted 


loo4]  The  royal  wedding  531 

on  the  vo3'age  by  150  vessels,  carrying  a  splendid  retinue  and  treasure 
in  bullion  amounting  to  half-a-raillion  of  English  money.  The  marriage 
ceremony,  performed  by  Gardiner,  took  jDlace  in  the  Cathedral  Church 
of  his  own  diocese  of  Winchester.  At  the  conclusion,  proclamation 
was  made  of  the  future  style  of  Philip  and  his  bride,  —  "King  and 
Queen  of  England,  France,  Naples,  Jerusalem,  and  Ireland,  Defenders 
of  the  Faith,  Princes  of  Spain  and  Castile,  Archdukes  of  Austria, 
Dukes  of  Milan,  Burgundy,  and  Brabant,  Counts  of  Habsburg,  Flanders, 
and  Tyrol."  Their  public  entry  into  London  took  place  towards  the 
close  of  August ;  and  the  capital  now  became  thronged  with  Spaniards, 
among  whom  priests  and  friars  formed  a  considerable  element.  The 
regularity  with  which  Philip  attended  mass  and  observed  the  other 
offices  of  his  Church  was  necessarily  construed  into  evidence  of  his  de- 
signs for  the  restoration  of  the  Roman  worship ;  nor  can  it  be  doubted 
that  both  to  him  and  Mary  this  appeared  as  the  paramount  object  com- 
manding their  attention. 

Among  the  royal  advisers  Gardiner  and  Paget,  by  virtue  of  both 
experience  and  ability,  assumed  the  foremost  place.  Neither,  however, 
could  be  said  to  be  recommended  by  consistency  of  principle  in  his 
past  career  ;  they  had,  at  more  than  one  juncture,  been  rivals  and 
even  bitter  enemies,  and  they  still  differed  widely  in  their  policy  and 
aims.  While  Gardiner,  who  aspired  to  a  dictatorship  in  the  Council, 
insisted  on  immediate  and  coercive  measures  against  heresy,  Paget, 
although  admitting  that  the  re-establishment  of  the  ancient  faith 
was  essential  to  a  satisfactory  adjustment  of  the  affairs  of  the  realm, 
demurred  to  what  he  termed  methods  of  "fire  and  blood."  In  their 
perplexity  the  two  sovereigns  appear  alike  to  have  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  it  might  be  well  to  take  counsel  with  advisers  who,  by 
their  remoteness  from  the  theatre  of  recent  events,  might  be  better 
able  to  take  a  dispassionate  view.  Foremost  among  these  stood  Regi- 
nald Pole,  who,  as  Legate,  had  already,  in  the  preceding  April,  at  ^Mary's 
request,  nominated  six  more  Bishops  to  fill  the  vacant  sees,  —  White, 
to  Lincoln  ;  Bourne,  to  Bath ;  Morgan,  to  St  David's  ;  Brooks,  to 
Gloucester;  Cotes,  to  Chester;  Griffith,  to  Rochester.  In  a  highly 
characteristic  letter  the  Legate  himself  now  appealed  to  King  Philip  to 
admit  him,  as  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  "  at  that  door  at  which  he  had  so  long 
knocked  in  vain."  A  precedent  afforded  by  the  records  of  Gardiner's  own 
see  of  Winchester  was  at  the  same  time  opi)ortunely  brought  forward  as 
a  solution  of  the  difficulty  caused  by  Pole's  still  unreversed  attainder. 
In  the  fifteenth  century,  when  the  proctor  of  the  English  Crown  appealed 
against  the  exercise  of  the  legatine  functions  with  whicli  Martin  V  had 
invested  Cardinal  Beaufort,  at  that  time  also  Bishop  of  Wincliester,  it 
had  been  suggested  that  Beaufort  might  act  tanquam  cardinalis  although 
not  tanquam  legatus.  It  was  now  ruled  that  Pole  might  be  admitted 
into  the  realm  as  a  Cardinal  Ambassador  although  not  as  Legate  ; 


532  Arrival  of  Pole  [l554 

while  the  apprehensions  which  this  decision  might  have  aroused  were  to 
a  great  extent  dissipated  when  it  was  known  that  he  had  obtained  from 
the  Pontiff  powers  whereby  he  would  be  able  to  grant  to  all  holders  of 
monastic  and  collegiate  lands  the  right  of  continuing  in  possession. 

On  November  20  Pole  landed  at  Dover,  and  proceeded  thence  by 
Canterbury  and  Rochester  to  Gravesend.  Here  he  was  presented 
with  two  documents  which  finally  cleared  away  all  impediments  from 
his  path  :  the  first,  an  Act  of  Parliament,  passed  ten  days  before, 
reversing  his  attainder  ;  the  second,  letters  patent  brought  by  the 
Bishop  of  Durham,  empowering  him  to  exercise  without  restraint  his 
functions  as  Legate.  His  progress  from  Gravesend  to  Whitehall,  accord- 
ingly, resembled  a  triumphal  procession,  and  on  his  arrival  in  the 
capital  he  was  greeted  with  special  honour  by  Philip  and  Mary. 
Writs,  in  which  the  title  of  "  Supreme  Head "  was  discarded,  were 
forthwith  issued  for  a  third  Parliament,  to  meet  on  November  12  ;  and 
on  the  27th  the  Legate  delivered  before  the  assembled  members  a 
Declaration,  couched  in  highly  figurative  language,  explanatory  of  the 
circumstances  under  which  he  had  been  sent,  of  the  object  of  his  coming, 
and  of  the  powers  with  which  he  had  been  invested.  At  the  conclusion 
of  his  address  he  was  formally  thanked  by  Gardiner,  and  after  he  had 
quitted  the  assembly  the  Chancellor  declared  that  he  had  spoken  as  one 
inspired.  On  the  following  day  the  question  was  put  to  both  Houses, 
whether  England  should  return  to  the  obedience  of  the  Apostolic  See  ? 
The  affirmative  was  carried  without  a  dissentient  among  the  Peers,  and 
with  but  two  in  the  Commons.  On  St  Andrew's  Day,  Pole,  on  bended 
knee  before  Mary,  presented  her  with  the  Supplication  of  the  two  Houses, 
"  that  they  might  receive  absolution,  and  be  readmitted  into  the  body  of 
the  Hol}^  Catholic  Church,  under  the  Pope,  the  Supreme  Head  thereof." 
After  further  formalities,  and  intercession  made  by  King  and  Queen  on 
behalf  of  the  Houses,  Pole  pronounced  the  absolution  and  received  the 
petitioners,  by  his  authority  as  Legate,  "  again  into  the  unity  of  our 
Mother  the  Holy  Church." 

The  legislation  of  the  two  preceding  reigns  in  all  that  related  to  the 
authority  of  the  Roman  see  was  now  rescinded  ;  and  on  Advent  Sunday 
Gardiner,  at  Paul's  Cross,  in  the  presence  of  the  King  and  the  Legate, 
called  upon  the  nation  to  rouse  itself  from  the  slumbers  and  delusions 
of  the  past  years  and  to  return  to  the  true  fold,  while  he  himself  at  the 
same  time  abjured  the  doctrine  set  forth  in  his  Be  Vera  Ohedientia  and 
declared  his  unreserved  submission  to  the  papal  power. 

Another  Supplication,  and  one  of  very  different  tenour,  now  issued 
from  within  tliose  prison  walls  where  the  chief  leaders  of  the  Reformers 
were  confined.  It  detailed  the  hardships  to  which  they  were  subjected  ; 
claimed  that  the  accusations  brought  against  them  should  be  distinctly 
stated,  in  order  that  they  might  be  heard  in  their  own  defence  ;  and,  since 
it  was  as  heretics  that  they  had  been  singled  out  for  imprisonment,  they 


1555]  The  first  martjjrs  533 

urged  that  "  heresy  "  should  be  legally  defined.  Parliament's  response  to 
this  appeal  was  the  re-enactment  of  three  ancient  statutes  formerly  in 
force  against  Lollardism.  The  measure  passed  rapidly  through  both 
Houses,  the  only  opposition  which  it  encountered  proceeding  from  the 
Lords,  where  some  objection  was  urged  to  the  restoration  of  the  old 
episcopal  jurisdiction,  while  the  penalties  enacted  were  pronounced 
excessive.  As  the  result  of  this  legislation,  John  Rogers  (the  proto- 
martyr  of  the  reign)  died  at  the  stake  in  the  following  February  ;  and 
a  series  of  like  tragical  scenes  followed,  in  which  the  suft'erings  of  the 
martyrs  and  the  fortitude  with  which  they  were  endured,  combined 
to  produce  a  widespread  impression.  So  marked,  indeed,  was  the 
popular  sympathy,  that  Renard  felt  bound  to  suggest  to  Philip  the 
employment  of  less  extreme  measures,  "  otherwise  the  heretics  would 
take  occasion  to  assert  that  the  means  employed  by  the  Church  to 
bring  back  perverts  to  the  fold  were,  not  teaching  and  example,  but 
cruel  punishments."  He  further  advised  that  Pole  should,  from  time 
to  time,  have  audience  of  the  Council  and  be  consulted  by  them  with 
regard  to  the  penalties  to  be  enforced.  Unfortunately,  neither  Gardiner 
nor  Pole  was  inclined  from  previous  experience  to  advocate  a  lenient 
course.  The  former  was  especially  anxious  to  give  proof  of  the  sin- 
cerity of  his  recent  repudiation  of  his  former  tenets;  the  latter  was 
scarcely  less  desirous  of  showing  that  under  a  gentle  demeanour  he 
was  capable  of  cherishing  a  strong  purpose.  Five  years  before,  when 
his  merits  as  a  candidate  for  the  tiara  were  under  discussion  at  the 
Conclave,  it  had  been  urged  against  Pole  that  when  at  Viterbo  he  had 
been  wanting  in  the  requisite  severity  towards  obstinate  heretics ;  and 
he  had  himself  always  claimed  to  have  inclined  to  mercy  when  assisting 
at  the  conferences  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  But  he  was  especially 
anxious  at  this  time  to  leave  no  occasion  for  a  similar  reproach  in 
England,  and  his  discharge  of  his  functions  during  the  remainder  of 
the  reign  cannot  be  regarded  as  lenient ;  although  in  Convocation,  as 
late  as  January,  1555,  he  admonished  the  Bishops  to  use  gentleness 
in  their  endeavours  towards  the  reclaiming  of  heretics. 

For  the  merciless  severities  which  ensued,  the  violence  of  the  more 
intolerant  Reformers  also  afforded  a  partial  extenuation;  and  it  is 
now  generally  admitted  that  the  part  played  by  Bonner  was  not  that 
attributed  to  him  by  Foxe,  of  a  cruel  bigot  who  exulted  in  sending 
his  victims  to  the  stake.  The  number  of  those  put  to  death  in  his 
diocese  of  London  was  undoubtedly  disproportionately  large,  but  this 
would  seem  to  have  been  more  the  result  of  the  strength  of  the  Reforming 
element  in  the  capital  and  in  Essex  than  to  the  employment  of  ex- 
ceptional rigour ;  while  the  evidence  also  shows  that  he  himself  dealt 
patiently  with  many  of  the  Protestants,  and  did  his  best  to  induce  them 
to  renounce  what  he  conscientiously  believed  to  be  tlieir  errors. 

In   the   course   of   1555   events   abroad   brought   about  a  further 


534  Election  of  Caraffa  as  Pope  [i555 

modification  of  the  relations  of  England  with  the  Holy  See.  In  Feb- 
ruary an  embassy  had  been  sent  to  Julius  III,  to  make  known  to  him 
the  unreserved  submission  of  the  English  Parliament.  The  ambas- 
sadors x^roceeded  leisurely  on  their  journey,  and  while  still  on  the  way 
were  met  by  the  tidings  of  the  Pontiff's  death,  which  had  taken  place  on 
March  23.  Charles  forthwith  sent  an  urgent  request  to  Pole  to  repair  to 
Rome,  in  order  to  support  the  imperial  interests  in  the  new  election. 
The  Cardinal,  however,  sought  to  be  excused,  on  the  ground  that  the 
negotiations  for  peace  were  even  of  yet  greater  importance  for  the  welfare 
of  Christendom.  His  friend,  Cardinal  Alessandro  Farnese,  hastened  from 
Avignon  to  Rome,  in  order  to  support  his  claims  in  the  Conclave;  but 
Pole  himself  seemed,  according  to  Michiel,  without  any  personal  ambition 
at  this  crisis.  The  efforts  of  France  were  forestalled  by  the  election  of 
Cardinal  Corvini;  but,  before  another  three  weeks  had  elapsed,  Marcel- 
lus  II  himself  was  no  more. 

This  second  opportunity  seemed  both  to  Mary  and  to  Gardiner  one 
that  should  not  be  disregarded,  and  Pole's  claims  were  now  strongly 
urged ;  even  Noailles  admitted  that  no  election  was  more  likely  to  bring 
peace  to  Christendom,  nor  could  he  conceive  of  any  other  Pontiff  who 
would  hold  the  balance  with  such  equal  impartiality  between  France  and 
the  Empire.  Again,  however,  the  Italian  party  triumphed ;  and  even 
Pole  himself  may  have  questioned  the  wisdom  of  his  abstention  when 
Gian  Pietro  Caraffa  (now  in  his  eightieth  year)  succeeded  as  Paul  IV  to 
the  papal  chair.  The  house  of  Caraft'a  was  Neapolitan  and  had  long 
been  on  friendly  terms  with  France,  while  it  cherished  a  corresponding 
hereditary  enmity  towards  Spain.  Paul  could  remember  Italy  in  the 
days  of  her  freedom,  and  his  hatred  of  the  Spanish  domination  had  been 
intensified  by  not  unf  requent  collisions  with  the  imperial  representatives 
in  the  Neapolitan  territory,  and  not  least  by  the  strenuous  efforts  they 
had  made  to  defeat  his  election  to  the  Archbishopric  of  Naples.  The 
bestowal  of  Milan  and  the  crown  of  Italy  on  Philip,  on  Iiis  betrothal  to 
Mary,  had  still  further  roused  Caraffa's  ire.  Paul,  indeed,  did  not 
scruple  to  accuse  Charles  of  dealing  leniently  with  heretics  in  order  to 
show  his  aversion  from  the  Roman  polic}^  Before  the  year  1555  closed 
he  had  concluded  a  secret  treaty  with  France,  which  had  for  its  special 
object  the  expulsion  of  the  imperialist  forces  from  the  Italian  peninsula. 
Charles,  when  informed  by  the  Nuncio  of  the  election,  blandly  observed 
that  he  could  well  remember,  when  himself  a  boy  of  fourteen,  hearing 
the  new  Pope  .sing  mass  at  Brussels.  Michiel,  however,  to  whom  Philip 
at  Hampton  Court  communicated  tlie  intelligence,  could  perceive  that 
neither  the  King  himself  nor  those  "  Spanish  gentlemen  "  with  whom  he 
found  the  opportunity  of  conversing  at  Richmond  were  pleased,  and 
says  plainly  :  "  They  by  no  means  approve  of  this  election."  In  the  same 
letter  (June  6)  he  informs  the  Doge,  that  "  Her  Majesty  expects  and 
hopes  during  this  week  to  comfort  the  realm  by  an  auspicious  delivery  "  ; 


1555]         Disappointment  as  vegards  the  Succession         535 

although  he  adds  that  this  is  earlier  than  the  ladies  of  the  bedchamber 
anticipate. 

On  Hampton  Court,  whither,  some  two  months  before.  Sir  Henry 
Bedingfield  had  conducted  the  Princess  Elizabeth,  the  main  interest 
of  the  English  nation  now  became  concentrated  ;  and  probably  no  period 
in  her  whole  life  was  marked  by  more  torturing  doubt  and  anxiety. 
Her  days  passed  in  almost  complete  solitude  ;  Gardiner,  the  Earl  of 
Arundel,  and  other  members  of  the  Council  were  her  only  visitors ;  the 
object  of  their  visits,  as  she  soon  became  painfully  aware,  being  to  draw 
from  her  some  unguarded  expression  which  might  be  construed  into  an 
admission  of  her  complicity  in  the  insurrection.  Their  design,  however, 
was  baffled  by  her  indignant  and  persistent  denials ;  and  when,  early 
in  July,  Mary  accorded  her  captive  an  interview,  Elizabeth  again,  and 
in  yet  stronger  language,  asseverated  her  entire  innocence.  A  visit  from 
the  King,  addressing  her  with  respectful  demeanour  and  kindly  words, 
encouraged  while  it  somewhat  mystified  her;  but  before  another  ten  days 
had  passed  away  the  sagacious  Princess  could  easily  interpret  the  change 
of  purpose  which  his  bearing  had  then  indicated. 

It  now  became  known  that  Mary  had  been  under  a  complete  delusion, 
and  that  there  would  probably  be  no  offspring  from  the  royal  marriage. 
Elizabeth's  supporters  at  once  took  heart  again,  as  they  realised  the 
change  which  had  supervened  in  regard  to  her  future  prospects.  They 
appeared  in  London  in  high  spirits  and  large  numbers,  so  comporting 
themselves,  indeed,  that  the  Council,  in  alarm,  ordered  the  more  promi- 
nent among  them  to  retire  to  their  estates,  as  suspected  heretics  and 
leagued  with  rebels.  But  Elizabeth  herself  was  set  at  liberty  and  sought 
again  her  former  seclusion  at  Ashridge ;  and,  as  Mary  slowly  awoke 
from  her  fond  dream  of  maternity,  Philip,  freed  from  the  obligation 
which  had  detained  him  at  her  side,  began  to  advert  to  continental 
politics  and  to  plead  that  the  affairs  of  the  Continent  demanded  his 
personal  supervision  abroad.  Before,  however,  quitting  his  island  king- 
dom, he  deemed  it  necessary  to  advise  his  consort  with  respect  to  the 
treatment  of  Elizabeth  during  his  absence  —  advice  which  differed 
materially  from  that  given  by  his  father.  It  was  no  longer  suggested 
that  political  exigencies  might  call  for  the  sacrifice  of  a  sister's  life. 
On  the  contrary,  Mary  was  now  recommended  to  extend  all  possible 
indulgence  to  the  Princess,  and  the  changed  conditions  of  Elizabeth's 
existence  became  obvious  even  to  the  public  at  large  ;  nor  did  intelligent 
observers  require  to  be  reminded  that  the  daughter  of  Anne  Boleyn  was 
the  only  barrier  to  the  succession  of  Mary  Stewart,  the  betrothed  of  the 
French  monarch,  to  the  throne  of  England. 

But  round  the  present  occupant  of  that  throne  the  clouds  were 
gathering  more  darkly  than  before,  and  Mary's  temper  and  healtli  were 
visibly  affected  by  the  wanton  imputations  directed  against  both  herself 
and  Philip.     Among  the  Spanish  party,  not  a  little  chagrined  at  the 


536  Departure  of  Philip  [i555 

royal  disillusionment,  there  were  those  who  represented  the  young  King- 
as  the  victim  of  a  designing  woman,  and  who  affected  to  believe  that 
Mary's  pretended  pregnancy  was  a  mere  device  to  detain  her  husband 
by  her  side.  The  Council,  on  the  other  hand,  had  to  listen  to  allegations 
which  asserted  that  the  King,  despairing  of  a  lineal  succession,  was 
meditating  a  coup  de  main,  by  bringing  over  large  bodies  of  Spanish 
troops  and  occupying  the  harbours  and  ports,  and  thus  realising  the 
long-suspected  design  of  the  Habsburg,  —  the  reduction  of  England  to 
a  dependency  of  Spain.  Both  Charles  and  Philip,  again,  became  aware 
that  with  Mary's  vanished  hopes  a  considerable  advantage  in  their 
negotiations  with  France  had  also  disappeared;  and  the  malicious  ex- 
ultation of  Noailles  knew  no  bounds.  Rarely  in  the  annals  of  royalty 
in  England  had  satire  and  ridicule  been  at  once  so  rancorous  and  so 
unmerited.  The  haughty  Habsburg,  acutely  sensitive,  under  a  seemingly 
impassive  exterior,  to  all  that  affected  his  personal  dignity,  determined 
to  quit  the  country,  and,  in  obedience  to  his  father's  behest,  to  devote 
himself  to  the  affairs  of  those  vast  possessions  which  he  was  soon  to 
be  called  upon  to  rule.  On  August  28,  1555,  Philip  sailed  for  the 
Low  Countries. 

The  incidents  which  preceded  his  departure  are  described  in  detail 
by  Michiel.  Before  embarking,  the  King  summoned  the  lords  of  the 
Council  to  the  Council  Chamber,  and  there  handed  them  a  series  of 
suggestions  for  the  government  of  the  realm  during  his  absence,  together 
with  a  list  of  names  of  those  whom  he  deemed  most  eligible  for  the 
conduct  of  affairs.  If  we  may  credit  the  Venetian  envoy,  the  judgment 
and  ability  displayed  in  this  document  excited  the  approval  and  ad- 
miration of  all  who  perused  it.  At  Greenwich,  where  Philip  embarked, 
he  took  leave  of  Mary  at  the  head  of  the  staircase  of  their  apartments ; 
the  Queen  maintaining  her  self-possession  until  he  was  gone,  and  then 
giving  way  to  uncontrollable  grief.  Pole,  whom  the  King  had  designated 
as  her  chief  counsellor,  was  indeed  now  the  only  adviser  to  whom  she 
could  turn  with  any  confidence,  and  her  sense  of  loneliness  and  desertion 
was  intense.  The  Cardinal,  touched  by  her  pitiable  condition,  compiled 
a  short  prayer  for  her  use  during  her  husband's  absence. 

The  departure  of  Philip  was,  however,  perfectly  justified  by  the 
pressing  state  of  affairs  at  the  imperial  Court,  whither  he  had  already 
received  more  than  one  urgent  summons  from  his  father.  Charles' 
health  was  giving  way,  and,  although  only  in  his  fifty-sixth  year,  he  was 
already  contemplating  retirement  to  "  our  kingdoms  of  Spain,"  there 
"  to  pass  the  rest  of  our  life  in  repose  and  tranquillity."  But  before 
this  could  be,  it  was  imperative  that  he  should  make  the  necessary  dis- 
positions for  the  succession  in  his  own  imperial  domains ;  while  he  also 
aspired  to  arrange,  if  possible,  for  the  regal  succession  in  England. 
Although  no  reasonable  hope  of  issue  from  his  son's  marriage  could 
now  be  entertained,  the  astute  Emperor  would  not  abandon  his  project 


1555]  Abdication  of  Charles  V  537 

of  securing  the  English  Crown  to  his  own  House  without  a  final 
effort ;  and  he  now  proposed  that  the  Princess  Elizabeth  should  be 
betrothed  to  his  nephew,  the  Archduke  Ferdinand.  But  in  return 
for  the  accession  of  territorj'  and  influence  that  would  thus  accrue 
to  the  Austrian  branch,  he  insisted  that  Philip  should  receive  for 
Italy  the  title  of  "Vicar  of  the  Empire,"  implying  the  delegation  of  the 
supreme  imperial  power.  The  objections  of  Ferdinand  prevented  the 
public  execution  of  this  stipulation,  which  was  however  later  secretly 
carried  out.  For  a  time,  indeed,  it  was  currently  reported  that 
Ferdinand's  succession  to  the  Empire  itself  was  in  jeopardy ;  a  cool- 
ness arose  between  the  two  brothers  ;  and  when  on  October  25,  1555, 
Charles  made  a  formal  surrender  at  Brussels  of  his  Flemish  provinces  to 
his  son,  neither  the  King  of  the  Romans  nor  his  son  ^Maximilian 
appeared  in  the  august  assemblage.  The  ceremony  took  place  in  the 
Town  Hall  of  the  capital,  where  Charles,  taking  his  seat  on  his  throne, 
with  Philip  on  his  right  hand  and  Mary,  the  late  Regent  of  the  Low 
Countries,  on  his  left,  and  surrounded  by  his  nobles  and  ministers 
of  State  and  the  delegates  of  the  provinces,  formally  ceded  to  his 
son,  the  "King  of  England  and  of  Naples,"  the  entire  surrounding 
territories  —  "  the  duchies,  marquisates,  principalities,  counties,  baronies, 
lordships,  villages,  castles,  and  fortresses  therein,  together  with  all  the 
royalties." 

It  can  scarcely  be  deemed  surprising  if,  amid  these  new  and  vast  re- 
sponsibilities, Philip's  insular  kingdom  and  its  lonely  Queen  might  seem 
at  times  forgotten  ;  or  that  Charles,  whose  design  it  had  been  to  set  out 
for  Spain  as  soon  as  possible,  found  his  departure  unavoidably  retarded 
until  the  year  1556  was  far  advanced.  But  in  the  February  of  that 
year  the  Truce  of  Vaucelles  ended  for  a  time  the  hostilities  with  France, 
Henry  thereby  retaining  possession  of  the  entire  territories  of  the  Duke 
of  Savoy.  With  his  habitual  want  of  good  faith,  however,  the  French 
monarch  did  not  scruple,  whenever  an  opportunity  presented  itself,  still 
secretly  to  foment  insurrection  against  both  Philip  and  Mary  in  their 
respective  domains. 

At  length,  on  August  9,  the  Emperor  finally  quitted  Brussels,  and 
embarked,  a  month  later,  for  Spain.  His  departure  was  pathetically 
deprecated  and  deplored  by  Mary,  Avho,  now  guided  almost  solely  by 
Pole,  had  during  the  previous  year  been  directing  her  main  efforts  to 
the  suppression  of  heresy  within  her  realm. 

The  entire  number  of  those  who  thus  suffered  during  her  reign  was 
less  than  400,  —  a  number  wliich  appears  small  when  contrasted  with  the 
thousands  who  had  already  died  in  a  like  cause  in  Provence,  or  who  were 
destined  to  do  so  in  the  Low  Countries.  But  the  social  eminence,  high 
character,  and  personal  popularity  of  not  a  few  of  the  English  martyrs, 
unalloyed,  as  in  many  cases  these  qualities  were,  with  political  dis- 
affection, served  to  invest  their  fate  with  a  peculiar  interest  in  the  eyes 


538  The  Protestant  martyrs  [l555 

of  their  fellow-countrymen,  —  an  interest  which  Foxe's  Book  of  Martyrs, 
chained  to  the  "  eagle  brass  "  of  many  a  parish  church,  did  much  to 
perpetuate.  The  prominence  thus  secured  for  that  partial  record  was 
the  means  of  winning  for  its  contents  an  amount  of  attention  from  later 
historical  writers  greatly  in  excess  of  its  actual  merits.  It  needed,  how- 
ever, neither  misrepresentation  nor  partisanship  to  gain  for  many  of  the 
martyrs  of  Mary's  reign  the  deep  sympathy  of  observant  contemporaries. 
John  Rogers,  once  a  prebendary  of  St  Paul's  and  lecturer  on  divinity, 
followed  to  the  stake  by  his  wife  and  children,  nerved  by  their  ex- 
hortations, and  expiring  unmoved  and  unshaken  before  their  gaze,  —  the 
reasonable  defence  and  legally  strong  position  of  Robert  Ferrar,  the 
former  Bishop  of  St  David's,  —  the  transparent  honesty  and  scholarly 
acumen  of  John  Bradford,  —  the  fine  qualities  and  youthful  heroism  of 
Thomas  Hawkes  (whom  Bonner  himself  would  gladly  have  screened),  — 
all  commanded  sympathy  and  were  entirely  dissociated  from  that  political 
discontent  which  undoubtedly  called  for  prompt  and  stern  repression. 

With  regard  however  to  the  three  distinguished  martyrs,  who  died 
at  Oxford,  there  was  a  wide  difference.  In  proportion  to  their  eminence 
had  been  their  offence  as  contumacious  offenders.  Cranmer,  as  signatory 
to  the  late  King's  will  and  thereby  participant  in  the  diversion  of  the 
Succession  as  well  as  in  the  actual  plot  on  behalf  of  the  Lady  Jane,  had 
two  years  before  been  condemned  to  suffer  the  penalty  of  high  treason. 
And  although  the  extreme  penalty  had  been  remitted,  the  sentence  had 
carried  with  it  the  forfeiture  of  his  archbishopric,  and  he  remained  a 
prisoner  in  the  Tower.  His  captivity  was  shared  by  Ridley  and  Latimer, 
of  whom  the  former  had  been  scarcely  less  conspicuous  in  his  support  of 
the  Lady  Jane,  while  the  latter,  as  far  back  as  the  reign  of  Henry,  had 
been,  for  a  time,  a  prisoner  within  the  same  walls,  denounced  as  active 
in  "moving  tumults  in  the  State."  Had  it  not  been  for  Wyatt's 
conspiracy  they  would  probably  have  regained  their  freedom  ;  but  with 
that  experience  Mary  came  to  the  conclusion  that  her  past  clemency  had 
been  a  mistaken  policy,  and  in  conjunction  with  Pole  she  now  resolved 
to  show  no  leniency  to  those  convicted  of  heretical  doctrine.  Such  a 
mode  of  procedure  was  convenient  when  compared  with  prosecutions 
for  treason,  as  at  once  less  costly,  more  expeditious,  and  allowing  the 
use  of  evidence  afforded  by  the  culprits  themselves.  It  was  also  certain 
that  not  one  of  the  three  distinguished  ecclesiastics  would  have  ventured 
to  deny  that  heresy  was  an  offence  which  called  for  the  severest  penalties. 
Cranmer,  in  conjunction  with  his  chaplain  Ridley,  had  pronounced 
sentence  in  1549  on  Joan  Bocher,  and  in  doing  so  had  been  perfectly 
aware  that  her  condemnation  involved  her  death  by  burning  at  the 
hands  of  the  secular  power.  Ridley  in  his  notable  sermon  at  Paul's 
Cross  in  1553  had  denounced  Mary  as  a  usurper,  not  on  the  ground 
of  the  illegality  of  her  succession  but  as  one  altogether  intractable  in 
matters  of  "  truth,  faith  and  obedience."     Latimer,  when  Bishop    of 


1554]  Latimer,  Cranmer,  and  Ridley  539 

Worcester,  had  expressed  his  unreserved  approval  of  a  sentence  whereby 
a  number  of  Anabaptists  perished  at  the  stake  ;  and,  on  the  occasion 
when  Friar  Forest  met  with  a  like  fate  for  denying  the  supremacy 
claimed  by  Henry  VIII,  had  preached  against  the  papal  claims  to 
spiritual  jurisdiction  in  England.  Accordingly,  just  as  the  Reformers 
had  resorted  to  political  rebellion  in  order  to  bring  about  the  down- 
fall of  theological  error,  so  the  Crown  now  sought  to  punish  political 
disaffection  on  the  grounds  of  religious  heresy.  The  power  which 
invoked  the  law  could  also  enforce  its  own  definition  of  the  offence. 

The  Reformers  had  however  frequently  complained  that  they  suffered 
l^ersecution  as  heretics,  while  the  exact  nature  of  their  offence  remained 
itself  undefined.  It  was  accordingly  resolved  that  no  doubt  should  be 
suffered  to  remain  in  the  cases  of  Latimer,  Cranmer,  and  Ridley  :  —  out 
of  their  own  mouths  should  their  condemnation  be  justified.  Such  was 
the  design  with  which,  in  March,  1554,  they  were  brought  from  the 
Tower  to  Oxford,  and  there  called  upon  to  defend,  in  a  formal  disputa- 
tion, their  doctrine  respecting  the  Mass.  Nor  would  it  have  been  easy 
to  take  exception  to  the  right  of  these  three  eminent  men  to  represent 
the  tenets  of  their  party.  The  first  had  been  Bishop  of  Worcester  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  ;  the  second  had  filled  the  see  of  Canterbury  for 
more  than  twenty  years  ;  the  third  had  been  Bishop  of  London,  and  in 
that  capacity  had  assisted  at  the  deprivation  of  Bonner  (his  predecessor, 
and  now  his  successor),  and  also  at  that  of  Gardiner.  All  three  again 
had  filled  positions  of  importance  in  their  University  of  Cambridge,  and 
were  presumed  to  be  masters  of  dialectical  disputation  ;  just  as  their 
opponents,  who  were  eleven  in  number,  had  been  selected  from  the  two 
Universities.  Latimer,  however,  was  now  in  his  seventieth  year,  and  it 
was  no  reflexion  on  his  courage  that  he  declined  an  ordeal  in  which 
quickness  of  apprehension  and  a  ready  memory  were  essentials.  The 
disputation  was,  however,  vigorously  maintained  by  Cranmer  and  Ridley 
in  conflict  with  their  numerous  antagonists.  But  they  did  so  only  to  be 
pronounced  defeated  ;  and  after  proceedings  which  extended  over  six 
days,  they  were  recommitted  to  "  Bocardo,"  as  the  common  gaol  was 
designated  (in  allusion  to  a  logical  position  from  which  a  disputant  finds 
it  impossible  to  extricate  himself).  The  condemnation  involved  the 
assumption  that  doctrines  of  faith  and  practice  were  amenable  to  the 
decisions  of  casuistry  rather  than  to  the  teaching  of  Scripture,  and  was 
therefore  contrary  to  the  principles  of  the  more  advanced  Reformers. 

The  captives  succeeded  in  corresponding  with  each  other  and  coming 
to  an  understanding  with  respect  to  a  declaration  of  their  distinctive 
tenets  (May,  1554).  Among  other  leading  divines  then  suffering  im- 
prisonment were  three  of  the  Bishops  created  in  Edward's  reign,—  John 
Hooper  of  Exeter,  Robert  Ferrar  of  St  David's,  and  Miles  Coverdale  of 
Exeter,  and  well-known  Reformers,  such  as  Rowland  Taylor,  John 
Philpot,  John  Bradford,  and  Edward  Crome.     But  none  of  these  were 


540  The  Reformers  petition  Parliament  [1554 

comparable  for  learning,  dialectical  capacity,  and  intellectual  acumen 
with  the  three  Bishops  whose  doctrines  already  stood  condemned  ;  and, 
when  the  other  Reformers  learnt  that  they  were  to  be  called  upon  to  face 
a  similar  ordeal,  they  anticipated  such  a  requirement  by  an  intimation 
that  they  would  not  consent  to  engage  in  a  formal  disputation  but  were 
willing  to  set  forth  their  views  and  defend  them  in  writing. 

They  also  explained  what  their  leading  tenets  were  :  —  the  acceptance 
of  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith  alone,  the  repudiation  of  the 
doctrines  of  Purgatory  and  transubstantiation,  together  with  the  adora- 
tion of  the  Host,  clerical  celibacy,  and  Latin  services.  They,  however, 
professed  unqualified  loyalty  to  the  Queen  and  deprecated  all  con- 
spiracies against  her  authorit}^  With  respect  to  this  manifesto  no 
action  appears  to  have  been  taken  ;  but  the  petitioners  were  still 
detained  in  captivity,  and  before  the  year  closed  Parliament  enacted 
afresh  the  ancient  laws  against  Lollardism,  including  Archbishop 
Arundel's  notorious  statute  de  haeretieo  comburendo,  all  of  which  had 
been  abolished  by  Somerset.  Conscious  of  the  net  which  was  being 
drawn  around  them,  and  that  their  heresy  was  becoming  a  question  of 
life  or  death,  the  captives  instructed  John  Bradford  to  draw  up  in  their 
name  a  new  Declaration,  couched  however  in  far  from  conciliatory  terms. 
As  against  the  newly  enacted  laws  of  Richard  II  and  his  two  successors, 
they  appealed  to  Parliament  to  re-enact  the  "many  godly  laws  touching 
the  true  religion  of  Christ  "  set  forth  in  the  two  preceding  reigns  "  by 
two  most  noble  Kings";  laws  which,  they  affirmed,  had  been  passed 
only  after  much  discussion  among  the  doctors  of  Cambridge  and  Oxford, 
and  with  the  cordial  and  full  assent  of  the  whole  realm.  Not  a  single 
parish  in  England,  they  declared,  was  desirous  of  a  return  to  "the 
Romish  superstitions  and  vain  service  "  which  had  recently  been  intro- 
duced. They  maintained  that  the  homilies  and  services  adopted  during 
King  Edward's  reign  were  truly  Catholic,  and  were  ready  to  prove 
them  so  ;  or,  if  they  failed  in  this,  to  give  their  bodies  to  be  burned  as 
the  Lollard  laws  prescribed. 

The  Parliament  to  which  the  petitioners  appealed  gave  no  response 
to  their  supplication,  although  a  spirit  of  reaction  is  distinctly  discern- 
ible in  the  Commons  during  this  session.  That  body  had  shown  a 
marked  disinclination  to  re-enact  the  laws  against  Lollardism  ;  and 
although  it  had  consented  to  annul  the  ecclesiastical  legislation  of 
Henry  VIII,  so  far  as  this  affected  the  papal  prerogatives  and  authority, 
it  had  confirmed  institutions  and  individuals  alike  in  their  possession  of 
the  property  which  Henry  had  wrested  from  the  Church.  In  the  event, 
again,  of  the  royal  marriage  being  blessed  with  offspring,  Philip  had 
been  appointed  Regent,  should  he  survive  his  consort ;  but  his  regency 
was  to  last  only  so  long  as  the  minority  of  their  child,  and  was  to 
carry  with  it  tlie  obligation  to  reside  in  England.  And  finally,  it  was 
decided  that  the  articles  of  the  marriage  treaty  were  to  continue  in  full 


l55o]  The  martyrdoms  at  Oxford  541 

force,  while  the  proposal  that  Philip  himself  should  be  honoured  with  a 
solemn  coronation  was  rejected.  Altogether,  there  had  been  much  to 
remind  the  King  of  certain  essential  differences  between  monarchy  in 
Spain  and  monarchy  in  England.  And  when  on  January  IG,  1555,  the 
dissolution  of  Parliament  took  place,  Noailles  could  note,  with  mali- 
cious satisfaction,  the  smallness  of  the  retinue  which  accompanied  the 
sovereigns  to  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  dissatisfaction  shown  in  the 
House  itself  by  both  Mary  and  her  consort. 

After  a  painful  and  ignominious  imprisonment  extending  over  more 
than  two  years,  the  three  Bishops  found  themselves  in  September,  1555, 
again  seated  in  the  Divinity  School  at  Oxford,  awaiting  their  trial  for 
the  heresies  of  which  they  had  already  been  convicted.  The  conduct  of 
the  proceedings  was  entrusted  to  a  Commission  appointed  by  the  Legate  ; 
and  Cranmer,  the  first  who  was  formally  summoned,  stood  with  his  head 
covered,  pleading  at  the  outset  that  he  had  sworn  never  to  admit  the 
authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  in  England,  and  at  the  same  time 
refusing  to  recognise  that  of  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  who  had  been 
appointed  to  preside  over  the  proceedings,  as  his  lawful  judge.  Fresh 
charges,  among  them  his  marriage,  were  now  brought  against  him  ;  he 
was  then  cited,  as  a  Metropolitan,  to  appear  within  eighty  days  in  Rome 
to  answer  all  accusations,  and  was  finally  consigned  again  to  Bocardo. 
Ridley  and  Latimer  were  to  be  more  summarily  dealt  with.  Pole, 
indeed,  sent  Fray  de  Soto,  who  had  been  appointed  to  fill  the  Hebrew 
chair  at  Oxford  in  the  absence  of  Richard  Bruern,  to  argue  with  them. 
But  it  was  of  no  avail  ;  and  both  perished  at  the  same  stake,  "to  light," 
as  Latimer  himself  there  expressed  it,  "  such  a  candle  in  England  as 
should  never  be  put  out."  Cranmer,  who,  from  a  tower  above  his  prison 
chamber,  witnessed  their  dying  agonies,  showed  less  resolution ;  and 
when  Fray  de  Garcia,  the  newly  appointed  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity, 
was  sent  to  ply  him  with  further  arguments,  he  wavered,  and  admitted 
that  even  the  papal  supremacy,  now  that  it  had  been  recognised  by 
King,  Queen,  and  Parliament,  appeared  to  him  in  a  new  light.  He  Avas 
at  last  induced  to  sign  a  recantation,  declaratory  of  his  submission  to 
the  Pope  as  Supreme  Head  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  to  the  reigning 
sovereigns  of  his  country  and  their  laws.  His  formal  degradation,  how- 
ever, which  took  place  on  February  14,  opened  his  eyes  to  the  fact  that 
he  had  no  mercy  to  look  for  at  the  hands  of  the  papal  delegates  ;  and  as 
his  crozier  was  wrested  from  his  grasp,  and  the  mock  vestments  which 
symbolised  his  whole  ecclesiastical  career  were  successively  removed  from 
his  person,  and  the  pallium  taken  away,  he  resisted  forcibly,  at  the  same 
time  producing  from  his  sleeve  a  document  in  which  he  formally  appealed 
from  Paul  IV  to  the  next  General  Council.  Prior  to  this  ceremony  he 
had  for  a  few  weeks  been  consigned  to  the  care  of  the  Dean  of  Christ- 
church  and  had  lived  in  the  enjoyment  of  every  comfort ;  but  he  was  now 
once  more  consigned  to  Bocardo.    There,  the  terror  of  death  came  back. 


542  Death  of  Gardiner  [io55 

and  he  was  induced  to  transcribe  and  sign  other  recantations.  Eventually, 
however,  in  the  Church  of  St  Mary,  on  the  day  appointed  for  his  execu- 
tion, when  a  full  and  complete  declaration  of  his  penitence  which  should 
edify  the  religious  world  was  expected,  he  astonished  his  audience  by  a 
complete  disavowal  of  all  his  previous  recantations,  which  were  no  less 
than  six  in  number  ;  and,  when  he  was  led  forth  to  die,  his  vacillation 
in  the  prison  was  forgotten  in  his  heroism  at  the  stake.  Suffering, 
ostensibly,  as  a  heretic,  Cranmer  really  expiated  by  his  death  the  share 
which  he  had  taken  in  procuring  Henry's  first  divorce. 

To  the  reactionary  feelings  which  were  discernible  in  INIary's  third 
Parliament  the  martyrdoms  that  had  taken  place  between  February 
and  October,  1555,  had  lent  no  slight  additional  strength;  while  those 
of  Ridley  and  Latimer,  only  a  few  days  before  the  assembling  of  her 
fourth  Parliament  on  October  21,  must  have  been  especially  fresh  in 
men's  memories.  The  attention  of  the  new  House  was  first  invited  to 
the  needs  of  the  royal  exchequer,  and  Gardiner,  as  Chancellor,  exerted 
all  his  powers  to  induce  the  assembly  to  grant  a  substantial  subsidy. 
His  demands  were  acceded  to,  although  not  without  some  opposition  ; 
and  the  gift  of  a  million  pounds  —  the  payment  of  which,  in  the  case  of 
the  laity,  was  to  be  extended  over  two  years,  in  that  of  the  clergy,  over 
four — gave  promise  of  effective  relief  ;  the  latter  body,  if  we  may  credit 
Pole,  accepting  their  share  of  the  burden  with  exemplary  cheerfulness. 
To  Mary,  however,  this  satisfactory  result  must  have  appeared  dearly 
purchased,  involving  as  it  did  the  loss  of  her  Chancellor.  In  urging 
upon  Parliament  the  necessities  of  the  realm,  Gardiner's  oratorical  efforts, 
combined  with  the  dropsy  from  which  he  was  suffering,  brought  on 
complete  exhaustion  ;  and  although  he  sufficiently  recovered  to  admit 
not  only  of  his  removal  from  Whitehall  to  Winchester  House,  but  even 
of  his  presence  at  the  Cabinet  Councils  which  the  ministers  came  from 
Greenwich  to  attend,  it  soon  became  apparent  that  his  days  were 
numbered.  On  November  12  he  died.  The  reports  which  gained 
credit  among  his  enemies,  of  his  penitence  and  self-reproach  in  his  last 
hours,  have  been  shown  by  circumstantial  evidence  to  be  fabrications. 
Michiel,  one  of  the  least  prejudiced,  as  he  was  certainly  one  of  the  most 
competent,  observers,  recalls  the  late  Chancellor's  untiring  energy,  wide 
practical  knowledge,  keen  insight  into  character,  and  consummate  tact, 
and  represents  his  loss  as  irreparable  ;  an  estimate  which  the  undisguised 
joy  of  the  French  party  at  the  event  seems  only  to  confirm.  The  great 
prelate  was  ultimately  laid  to  rest  in  his  own  Cathedral,  to  which  he 
had  bequeathed  a  third  of  his  private  fortune,  and  where  his  chantry 
chapel,  in  the  Renaissance  style,  still  preserves  his  memory. 

On  the  day  preceding  Gardiner's  death  a  bill  was  read  in  the  House 
of  Lords  whereby  the  Crown  surrendered  into  the  hands  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff  the  first-fruits  and  tenths  of  all  ecclesiastical  benefices — for  "  the 
discharge  of  our  conscience,"  as  Mary  subsequently  expressed  it  in  a 


155g]  Marifs  increased  severity  543 

series  of  instructions  which  she  placed  in  the  hands  of  Pole.  But  the 
bill  when  it  came  down  to  the  Commons  at  once  gave  rise  to  a  warm 
discussion,  and  was  eventually  carried  against  an  ominous  minority  of 
126.  Six  days  later  (December  9),  ]\Iary  dissolved  Parliament  ;  and  two 
years  elapsed  before  it  met  again. 

In  the  meantime  the  royal  purpose  was  becoming  more  inexorable 
and  pronounced.  In  the  communications  to  Pole,  above  referred  to, 
Mary  gave  it  as  her  opinion  that  it  would  "  be  well  to  inflict  punish- 
ment "  on  those  "  who  choose  by  their  false  doctrine  to  deceive  simple 
persons."  It  was,  however,  her  express  desire  that  no  one  should  be 
burnt  in  London  "  save  in  the  presence  of  some  member  of  the  Council," 
and  that  during  such  executions  some  "  good  and  pious  sermons  should 
be  preached."  It  was  probably  under  the  belief  that  Pole's  better 
nature  would  exert  a  certain  influence,  that  Philip,  when  he  departed 
for  the  Low  Countries,  had  advised  ]Mary  to  take  the  Cardinal  for  her 
chief  counsellor.  But  firmness  was  never  one  of  Pole's  virtues,  and  when 
confronted  by  a  stronger  will,  in  conjunction  with  that  more  practical 
knowledge  of  men  and  affairs  in  which  he  was  notoriously  deficient,  he 
deferred  to  the  judgment  of  others  and  reluctantly  acquiesced  in  a 
policy  which  he  himself  would  never  have  originated.  But  he  still  at 
times  vacillated  ;  and,  as  we  have  already  noted,  would  recommend  the 
Bishops  to  have  recourse  to  gentle  methods  in  their  endeavours  to 
reclaim  heretics  ;  while  in  August,  1556,  he  succeeded  in  setting  free 
no  less  than  twenty  prisoners  whom  Bonner  had  condemned  to  the 
stake.  It  was  possibly  in  anticipation  of  his  resignation  of  the  office 
of  legatus  a  latere  that  Pole  aspired  to  succeed  Gardiner  as  Privy  Seal, 
for  the  incompatibility  of  the  two  offices  was  obvious  ;  the  seal  was 
ultimately,  at  Philip's  suggestion,  bestowed  on  Lord  Paget,  who,  as 
a  layman  and  a  statesman  of  known  tolerance  in  religious  questions, 
succeeded  on  January  29,  1556.  The  Chancellorship  was  not  bestowed 
on  Thirlby,  now  Bishop  of  Ely,  who  had  been  discharging  its  duties  as 
deputy  and  whose  claims  were  favoured  by  Mary  —  his  known  Catholic 
sympathies  rendering  it  inadvisable,  even  in  the  eyes  of  Philip,  to 
continue  him  in  the  office  ;  and  on  January  1,  the  Great  Seal  was 
conferred  on  Heath,  Archbishop  of  York.  Pole,  however,  succeeded 
Gardiner  as  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Cambridge  ;  and  on  March  22, 
1556,  the  day  after  Cranmer  was  burnt  at  Oxford,  he  was  consecrated 
to  the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury. 

Under  his  auspices,  and  with  the  aid  of  the  royal  munificence,  several 
of  the  foundations  which  had  been  swept  away  by  Mary's  father  in  his 
anger  at  their  contumacious  resistance  to  his  arbitrary  decrees  now 
rose  again.  The  Grey  Friars  reappeared  at  Greenwicli,  the  Carthusians 
gathered  once  more  in  their  splendid  monastery  at  Sheen,  the  P^rigettines 
reassembled  at  Sion  ;  while  Feckenham,  abandoning  his  deanery  at 
St  Paul's,  made  his  solemn  entry  into  Westminster  as  Abbot  of  a  body 


544  The  Dudley  conspiracy  [i556 

of  Benedictine  monks  who  took  the  places  of  the  expelled  canons. 
Parliament  had  ceased  from  troubling;  and,  with  the  false  teachers 
silenced,  the  heretical  books  suppressed,  the  authority  of  the  ecclesiastical 
courts  re-established,  the  new  Primate  might  almost  flatter  himself  that 
the  ideal  conditions  contemplated  in  his  Reformatio  Angliae  had  become 
an  accomplished  reality.  The  denunciation  of  the  Dudley  conspiracy 
rudely  dispelled  this  pleasing  vision.  On  Easter  Eve,  April  4,  1556, 
official  intelligence  was  received  of  a  new  plot,  having  for  its  aim  the 
seizing  of  Mary's  person  and  her  deposition,  in  order  to  make  Avay  for 
Elizabeth,  who  was  to  marr}",  not  Ferdinand,  but  Courtena}^ ;  —  a  name 
still  potent  to  conjure  with,  although  the  unfortunate  nobleman  was 
himself  unambitious  of  the  honour  and  then  nearing  his  end,  which 
came  to  him  in  the  following  September  near  Padua. 

The  plot  itself,  in  its  origin,  was  not  suggestive  of  any  very  deep 
or  widespread  agencies,  being  the  outcome  of  a  series  of  meetings 
among  some  country  gentlemen  in  Oxfordshire  and  Berkshire,  —  Sir 
Anthony  Kingston,  Sir  Nicholas  Throckmorton  (a  friend  of  Courtenay's, 
who  had  already  been  pardoned  for  complicity  in  Wyatt's  rebellion). 
Sir  Henry  Peckham,  and  Sir  Henry  Dudley,  a  relative  of  the  late  Duke 
of  Northumberland.  Further  evidence,  however,  obtained  at  a  con- 
siderable interval,  implicated  not  only  Noailles,  the  ambassador,  with 
whom  Dudley  was  in  correspondence,  but  also  Henry,  at  whose  Court 
Dudlej^  had  been  received  and  his  proposals  favourably  considered,  and 
finally  Elizabeth  herself.  The  fact  that,  in  the  preceding  February, 
Charles  and  Philip  had  concluded  at  Vaucelles  a  truce  with  Henry, 
which  was  to  last  for  five  years  and  included  important  concessions  to 
France,  showed  the  faithlessness  of  the  French  monarch.  Henry,  how- 
ever, advised  the  conspirators  to  defer  the  execution  of  their  plans,  and 
to  their  disregard  of  this  advice  the  collapse  of  the  whole  scheme  appears 
to  have  been  mainly  attributable. 

Among  the  arrests  made  in  England  were  those  of  two  members  of 
Elizabeth's  own  household  ;  of  these  a  son  of  Sir  Edmund  Peckham  (one 
of  Mary's  staunchest  supporters)  turned  King's  evidence  and  his  testi- 
mony chiefly  implicated  Elizabeth.  Again,  however,  Philip  exerted  his 
influence  for  her  protection,  while  the  Princess  asseverated  her  innocence. 
It  was  at  this  juncture.  May  25,  that  Noailles  himself  requested  to  be 
recalled  ;  he  had  indeed  some  fear  of  being  arrested  by  order  of  the 
Privy  Council.  His  place  at  the  English  Court  was  temporarily 
taken  by  a  brother,  a  councillor  of  the  Parlement  of  Bordeaux  ;  and 
it  was  not  until  November  2  that  Soranzo  was  able  to  report  the 
arrival  of  the  more  distinguished  brother,  F'rangois,  the  protonotar}^ 
and  Bishop  of  Acqs  or  Dax,  in  the  same  capacity.  To  Frangois  de 
Noailles  Elizabeth  confided  her  design  of  seeking  an  asylum  in  France  ; 
he  however  strongly  dissuaded  her  from  such  a  step,  suggesting  that 
her  best  policy  would  be  to  remain  in  England.     In  after  years  the 


1556-7]  Relations  of  Philip  with  Rome  545 

Bishop  of  Acqs  was  wont  to  boast  that  Elizabeth  was  indebted  to  him 
for  her  crown. 

Lord  Clinton  had  been  instructed  to  make  a  formal  protest  at  the 
French  Court  against  the  countenance  which  Henr}^  afforded  to  the 
English  malcontents  ;  but  his  remonstrance  onl}^  drew  from  tlie  King 
the  splenetic  observation  that  they  were  so  numerous  that  they  "  tilled 
not  only  France  but  the  whole  of  Italy."  In  the  Italian  peninsula, 
indeed,  Philip  now  found  himself  involved  in  relations  far  from  amicable 
with  the  reigning  Pontiff.  Caraffa's  aggressive  nature  did  not  dispose 
him  to  judge  charitably  of  others,  while  he  was  believed  by  Philij)  to 
harbour  designs  against  his  Neaj^olitan  kingdom.  The  Pope  was  espe- 
cially indignant  when  he  heard  of  the  Truce  of  Vaucelles ;  and,  when 
in  June,  1556,  despatches  were  intercepted  at  Terracina  sent  from  the 
Spanish  envoy  in  Rome  to  Alva,  Philip's  viceroy  in  Naples,  describing 
the  defenceless  condition  of  the  papal  territory,  his  suspicions  became 
certainty.  In  the  ensuing  month  his  nephew.  Cardinal  Caraffa,  arrived 
in  Paris  to  concert  measures  with  Henr}^  for  expelling  the  Spaniard 
altogether  from  Italy.  The  personal  ambition  of  the  Guises  favoured 
the  Pontiff's  projects,  and  war  was  ultimately  resolved  on.  Paul  cited 
both  Charles  and  Philip  before  him  as  vassals  who  had  been  unfaithful 
to  their  feudal  obligations,  pronounced  the  latter  deprived  of  his  king- 
dom of  Sicily,  and  detained  the  Spanish  envoy  a  prisoner  at  St  Angelo. 
Alva  issued  a  counter  manifesto  and  conducted  his  army  into  the  papal 
territory,  while  late  in  December  the  Duke  of  Guise  in  turn  made  a 
rejoinder  by  crossing  the  Alps  at  the  head  of  a  considerable  force. 

Such  was  broadly  the  political  situation  in  Europe  when  the  year 
1557  opened ;  England  appearing  leagued  with  Spain,  on  the  one  hand, 
against  France  aided  by  the  temporal  power  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  on 
the  other ;  while  Englishmen  in  turn  were  divided  between  sympathy 
with  those  of  their  countrymen  who  had  fled  from  persecution,  and 
resentment  at  the  manner  in  which  they  had  deserted  to  the  common 
foe. 

At  Calais  and  throughout  the  English  Pale  the  exiles  were  now 
discovered  to  be  concerting  with  the  native  Huguenot  element  the 
surrender  to  Henry  of  two  important  fortresses,  those  of  Guines  and 
Hames  (between  Guines  and  Calais),  —  a  design  which  was  defeated 
only  by  its  timely  discovery.  It  was  at  this  juncture  that  Philip  crossed 
over  to  Dover  and  from  thence  proceeded  to  Greenwich,  where  Mary 
was  residing.  Two  days  later  the  royal  pair  passed  through  London 
to  Whitehall  amid  the  acclamations  of  the  citizens.  The  King's  stay 
extended  over  nearly  four  months  (March  18-July  3),  and  to  tlie 
majority  his  visit  appeared  singularly  opportune.  The  immediate 
object  of  his  visit  — to  induce  Mary  to  join  him  in  his  impending 
war  with  France  —  was  one  in  favour  of  which  his  arguments  might 
well   appear   irresistible.     The  Duke  of   Guise  had  already  overrun 


54t6  Rebellion  of  Stafford  [i557 

his  Neapolitan  territory  ;  and  it  seemed  probable  that  the  King  of 
France  would  shortly  conquer,  if  not  vigorously  opposed,  all  that  was 
still  English  within  the  limits  of  his  realm.  Again,  and  for  the  last 
time,  Pole  found  himself  involved  in  relations  of  difficulty  with  the 
House  of  Habsburg ;  and  he  was  under  the  necessity  of  privately  ex- 
plaining by  letter  to  Philip  that  diplomatic  etiquette  forbade  that  the 
Legate  of  the  Holy  Father  should  meet  his  master's  declared  enemy ; 
whereupon  he  withdrew  quietly  to  Canterbury.  In  April,  however,  his 
embarrassment  received  an  unlooked-for  solution,  by  Paul's  peremptory 
recall  of  his  Legates  from  the  whole  of  Philip's  dominions ;  and  when 
King  and  Queen  joined  in  urging  that  the  actual  condition  of  England 
made  the  presence  of  a  Legate  exceptionally  necessary,  the  Pope  at  first 
sought  to  evade  compliance  by  offering  to  appoint  a  legatus  natus  and 
to  attach  the  office  to  the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury  Eventually, 
however,  in  a  Consistory  convened  on  June  14,  he  appointed  William 
Peto,  Mary's  former  confessor;  thus  substituting,  as  Phillips,  Pole's 
biographer,  indignantly  expresses  it,  a  begging  friar  for  the  royally 
descended  Cardinal  !  At  the  same  time,  the  merciless  Pontiff  cruelly 
wounded  his  former  Legate's  sensitive  spirit  by  insinuating  that  he  was 
a  heretic.  Pole  expostulated  in  an  Apology,  extending  over  eighty  folio 
pages,  vindicatory  of  his  whole  career  ;  but  Paul  never  revoked  the 
imputation,  which  darkened  the  Cardinal's  remaining  days. 

While,  in  the  meantime,  Philip  and  his  Queen  were  concerting 
measures  with  the  Council,  tidings  arrived  which  imparted  fresh  force 
to  the  Pope's  representations.  On  April  24  Thomas  Stafford,  a  nephew 
of  Pole  and  a  grandson  of  the  last  Duke  of  Buckingham,  had  set  sail 
Avith  two  ships  from  Dieppe  and,  having  landed  unopposed  on  the  York- 
shire coast,  had  seized  Scarborough  Castle.  Thence  he  issued  a  procla- 
mation, announcing  that  he  had  come  to  deliver  England  from  the 
tyranny  of  the  foreigner  and  to  defeat  "  the  most  devilish  devices  "  of 
Mary.  The  rebellion,  if  such  it  could  be  termed,  — for  Stafford's  appeal 
met  with  but  slight  response,  —  was  speedily  suppressed,  Wotton's  vigi- 
lance having  given  the  government  early  intimation  of  his  sailing ;  and 
its  leader  with  a  few  of  his  personal  adherents  were  captured  by  the 
Earl  of  Westmorland  and  sent  to  London.  Stafford  was  found  guilty 
of  high  treason,  and  suffered  the  punishment  of  a  traitor  at  Tyburn 
(May  28).  Henry,  who  designated  Stafford  as  "that  fool"  and  re- 
pudiated all  knowledge  of  his  mad  undertaking,  had  probably  full 
information  of  what  was  intended ;  and  on  June  7  war  with  France  was 
declared.  Affecting  to  regard  this  step  as  simply  further  evidence  of 
"the  Queen  of  England's  submission  to  her  husband's  will,"  Henry 
at  once  ordered  his  ambassador  at  her  Court  to  present  his  letters  of 
recall,  but  Frangois  de  Noailles  had  already  been  dismissed  by  Mary. 
On  his  way  back  to  Paris,  the  latter  stayed  at  Calais  and  made  a  careful 
survey  of  the  fortifications;  the  ruinous  condition  of  the  outer  wall 


1557]  Victories  of  Spain  in  Italy  and  France  547 

more  especially  attracted  his  attention  ;  and  on  liis  arrival  in  the 
capital  and  being  admitted  to  an  interview  with  the  King,  he  expressed 
his  belief  that  a  sudden  attack  made  by  an  adequate  force  on  that 
ancient  seaport  would  carry  all  before  it. 

Before  Philip  quitted  England  he  received  the  gratifying  intelligence 
that  Alva's  Fabian  tactics  had  been  successful  against  Guise,  and  that 
he  had  been  finally  driven  from  the  Neapolitan  territory.  The  mortifi- 
cation of  Paul  was  equally  intense,  for  he  had  scrupled  at  nothing  to 
bring  about  an  opposite  result  :  had  suggested  to  Solyman  a  descent 
on  the  Two  Sicilies,  and  had  brought  over  mercenaries  from  Protestant 
Germany,  —  and  all  this  in  order  to  defeat  the  forces  of  the  eldest  son  of 
the  Church  !  When  the  Duke  of  Guise  appeared  to  present  his  letters 
of  recall  the  Pope's  fury  passed  all  bounds  of  decorum  :  "  You  have 
done  little  for  your  King,  less  for  the  Church,  and  for  your  own  honour 
nothing."  Such  were  Paul's  parting  words,  although  he  little  deemed 
how  complete  and  how  lasting  the  failure  of  the  French  intervention 
was  to  prove,  and  that  the  Habsburg  rule  was  destined  to  remain  un- 
shaken, alike  in  the  north  and  south  of  the  Italian  land,  until  the  war 
of  the  Spanish  Succession. 

On  his  return  to  Brussels  Philip  was  accompanied  by  Michiel  Surian, 
who  had  been  appointed  ambassador  to  his  Court,  and  the  Venetian 
Republic  henceforth  maintained  no  resident  envoy  in  England.  Of 
English  affairs  it  had  recently  received  the  elaborate  "  Report "  drawn 
up  by  Giovanni  Michiel,  and  presented  to  the  Doge  and  Senate  in  the 
preceding  May.  The  King's  first  attention  was  now  directed  to  the  war 
with  France,  to  which  he  addressed  himself  with  unwonted  energy.  The 
signal  victory  of  his  arms  at  St  Quentin,  achieved  mainly  by  a  powerful 
division  of  Spanish  cavalry,  was  attended  by  the  capture  of  Montmorency, 
the  French  general,  and  the  dispersion,  with  great  slaughter,  of  his 
entire  army ;  and  three  weeks  later,  St  Quentin,  which  barred  the  road 
to  Paris,  was  surrendered  by  Coligny.  The  news  was  received  with 
great  rejoicings  in  London,  where  a  solemn  Te  Deum  was  sung ;  and  Pole, 
at  Mary's  request,  conveyed  her  congratulations  to  her  husband.  The 
conclusion  of  his  letter  is  noteworthy  :  "  We  are  anxiously  expecting 
news  of  some  good  agreement  with  his  Holiness,  which  may  our  Lord 
God  deign  to  grant."  With  the  Colonna  already  at  the  gates  of  Rome, 
even  Paul  himself  now  became  aware  that  to  yield  was  inevitable. 
Rarely  however  has  the  victor  used  his  success  with  greater  consideration 
for  the  vanquished.  When  Naples  and  its  territory  had  been  brought 
back  to  submission,  Alva  repaired  to  Rome,  and,  escorted  by  the  papal 
guard  into  the  Pontiff's  presence-chamber,  there  fell  upon  his  knees, 
imploring  pardon  for  having  dared,  even  at  the  command  of  his  temporal 
sovereign,  to  bear  arms  against  the  Church,  and  was  formally  absolved. 
And  again  in  London  there  were  bonfires  and  illuminations  in  celebra- 
tion of  a  peace,  —  the  peace  thus  effected  between  Pliilip  and  the  Papacy. 


54:8  The  loss  of  Calais  [1557-8 

Although  Mary  is  described  by  Michiel  in  his  "  Report "  as  friendly 
to  the  Scotch,  the  aid  which  she  afforded  Philip  in  his  war  with  France 
almost  necessarily  involved  hostilities  with  the  former  nation,  in  whose 
midst  Mary  of  Lorraine,  as  Regent,  had  been  for  some  time  past 
installing  her  countrymen  in  official  posts  with  undisguised  partiality. 
The  betrothal  of  the  Queen  of  Scots  to  the  Dauphin  and  the  intimate 
relations  which  the  Regent  had  throughout  maintained  with  the  French 
Court,  served  still  further  to  strengthen  the  political  alliance  between  the 
two  countries.  It  was  consequently  no  surprise  when,  in  October,  1547, 
it  became  known  in  London  that  the  Regent  had  built  a  fortress  to 
prevent  English  forces  from  marching  to  the  relief  of  Berwick  ;  that 
Scottish  troops  were  ravaging  the  country  south  of  the  Tweed  ;  that 
there  had  been  a  massacre  of  some  English  troops  which  had  ventured 
to  land  in  the  Orkneys  ;  and  that  a  battle  between  the  forces  of  the 
two  nations  on  the  frontier  was  regarded  as  imminent.  The  intelligence 
of  the  great  disaster  sustained  by  the  French  arms  at  St  Quentin  gave 
pause,  however,  to  the  Scottish  ardour.  A  council  was  convened  in  the 
church  at  Eckford,  where  the  expediency  of  continuing  the  war  was 
discussed,  the  decision  being  in  the  negative.  The  invading  force  was 
consequently  disbanded,  having  achieved  little  more  than  the  distraction, 
for  a  short  time,  of  the  attention  of  England  from  the  war  with  France, 
and  a  certain  addition  to  her  military  expenses.  On  April  24,  1558, 
the  marriage  of  Mary  Queen  of  Scots  with  the  Dauphin  was  celebrated 
Avith  great  splendour  in  Notre  Dame  ;  and  to  not  a  few  it  seemed  that 
France,  by  a  less  costly  process  than  armed  conquest,  had  effected  a  virtual 
annexation  of  Scotland.  In  the  following  November  the  National  Coun- 
cil, assembled  at  the  Palace  of  Holyrood,  decided  to  confer  on  the  King- 
Dauphin  (as  Francis  was  now  termed  in  Paris)  the  Crown  matrimonial. 

At  nearly  the  same  time  that  P'rangois  de  Noailles'  account  of  the 
neglected  condition  of  Calais  was  communicated  to  Henry,  Michiel,  in 
his  "  Report,"  had  described  the  town  as  an  almost  impregnable  fortress, 
garrisoned  by  500  soldiers  and  by  a  troop  of  50  horse.  Writing  on 
January  4,  1558,  he  had  to  inform  the  Doge  and  Council  of  Ten  that 
the  capture  of  Calais  was  imminent  ;  two  days  later.  Lord  Wentworth, 
notwithstanding  his  gallant  defence,  was  compelled  to  surrender  to  the 
Duke  of  Guise,  the  only  condition  that  he  could  obtain  being  that  the 
lives  of  the  inhabitants  and  of  the  garrison  were  to  be  spared.  They 
were  allowed,  however,  to  take  nothing  with  them,  tlie  soldiery  giving 
up  their  arms,  the  citizens  all  their  worldly  possessions.  A  fortnight 
later  the  garrisons  of  Guines  and  Hames  also  surrendered,  although  on 
somewhat  less  humiliating  terms.  The  expelled  population  of  Calais  be- 
took themselves  mostly  to  England,  where  their  destitute  and  homeless 
condition  served  still  further  to  increase  the  widespread  indignation  at 
the  supineness  and  stupidity,  as  well  as  the  suspected  treachery,  whereby 
the  last  stronghold  of  English  power  in  France  had  been  irrevocably  lost. 


1558]  Mari/s  last  days  549 

Early  in  the  year  Mary  again  became  a  prey  to  the  delusion  that 
she  was  about  to  become  a  mother,  and  Philip  was  at  once  informed. 
He  affected  to  entertain  no  misgiving,  and  before  the  end  of  January 
the  Count  de  Feria,  who  had  married  Jane  Dormer,  one  of  the  Queen's 
maids  of  honour,  was  sent  over  to  convey  the  King's  congratulations, 
England  was  already  known  to  the  new  ambassador,  who  now  assumed 
a  foremost  place  among  the  royal  counsellors.  De  Feria,  however,  had 
conceived  a  thorough  contempt  alike  for  English  institutions  and  the 
English  character.  He  had  been  instructed  especially  to  urge  two 
important  measures  —  the  equipment  of  a  fleet  for  the  defence  of  the 
coasts  and  the  enrolment  of  an  army  to  guard  the  Scotch  marches ;  and 
he  was  unable  to  comprehend  the  slowness  of  the  process  by  Avhich  the 
necessary  supplies  were  eventually  raised,  when  he  also  noted  the  apparent 
affluence  and  well-being  of  London  and  the  surrounding  districts.  Like 
Antoine  de  Noailles  before  him,  he  pronounced  the  English  character  to 
be  singularly  changeable  and  wanting  in  firmness  of  purpose.  His  sur- 
prise, however,  must  be  interpreted  as  illustrating  rather  the  relative 
comfort  in  which  the  population  lived,  as  compared  with  the  invariably 
scanty  fare  and  wretched  huts  of  the  people  in  Spain.  Otherwise,  the 
prevalence  of  ague  fever,  —  an  epidemic  which  raged  with  terrible  fatal- 
ity in  the  summer  and  autumn  of  the  years  1557  and  1558,  —  together 
with  the  dearness  of  corn,  the  languishing  state  of  trade  and  agricul- 
ture, and  the  heaviness  of  taxation,  contributed  to  render  the  general 
condition  of  the  country  depressing  in  the  extreme ;  while  the  popular 
dissatisfaction  became  further  intensified,  when  it  was  known  that  Philip 
was  employing  the  new  marine  exclusively  for  his  own  purposes. 

The  disappointment  and  chagrin  which  weighed  on  Mary's  spirits 
during  the  last  few  months  of  her  life  were  deepened  by  her  increasing 
ill  health  ;  and  her  morbid  condition  both  of  mind  and  body  appeared  to 
not  a  few  to  be  finding  expression  in  the  revival  of  religious  persecution. 
But  the  recurrence  of  secret  meetings,  open  manifestations  of  fierce 
discontent,  together  with  the  malevolence  which  assailed  Spaniards  even 
in  the  streets  of  the  capital,  may  be  accepted  as  affording  a  sufficient 
explanation  of  the  renewed  severities  which  marked  the  administra- 
tion of  Bonner's  Court,  where  treason  and  heresy  had  become  almost 
synonymous.  Although,  however,  opinion  may  differ  with  respect  to 
the  degree  and  character  of  the  chief  influences  in  operation,  it  is 
undeniable  that  feelings  of  aversion  on  the  part  of  the  people  from 
foreign  rule  and  papal  authority,  and  of  sullen  resentment  at  the 
humiliation  of  the  English  name  and  the  squandering  of  the  national 
resources,  were  alike  becoming  intensified,  when,  in  the  early  morning 
of  November  17,  Mary  of  England  passed  away,  to  be  followed  a  few 
hours  later  by  Archbishop  Pole  —  both  eminent  examples  of  the  inade- 
quacy of  deep  convictions  and  pious  motives  to  guide  the  State  aright. 


CHAPTER   XVI 

THE  ANGLICAN   SETTLEMENT  AND  THE 
SCOTTISH  REFORMATION 

When  at  the  beginning  of  1560  there  was  a  new  Pope,  pledged  to 
convoke  the  Council  for  a  third  time  and  to  stem  and  repel  the  tide  of 
heresy,  the  latest  disaster  that  met  his  eye  was  no  mere  relapse  of  Eng- 
land followed  by  a  lapse  of  Scotland  ;  for  what  was  shaping  itself  in 
the  northern  seas  already  looked  ominously  like  a  Protestant  Great 
Britain.  Two  small  Catholic  Powers  traditionally  at  war  with  each 
other,  the  one  a  satellite  of  the  Habsburg  luminary,  the  other  a  satellite 
of  France,  seemed  to  be  fusing  themselves  in  one  Power  that  might 
be  very  great :  great  perhaps  for  good,  but  more  probably  for  evil. 
"  Earnest  embracing  of  religion,"  wrote  a  Scottish  to  an  English 
statesman,  "will  join  us  straitly  together."  The  religion  that  William 
Maitland  meant  when  he  sent  these  words  to  Sir  William  Cecil  was  not 
the  religion  of  Pius  IV  and  the  General  Council. 

Suddenly  all  farsighted  eyes  had  turned  to  a  backward  country. 
Eyes  at  Rome  and  eyes  at  Geneva  were  fixed  on  Scotland,  and,  the 
further  they  could  peer  into  the  future,  the  more  eager  must  have  been 
their  gaze.  And  still  we  look  intently  at  that  wonderful  scene,  the 
Scotland  of  Mary  Stewart  and  John  Knox :  not  merely  because  it  is 
such  glorious  tragedy,  but  also  because  it  is  such  modern  history. 
The  fate  of  the  Protestant  Reformation  was  being  decided,  and  the 
creed  of  unborn  millions  in  undiscovered  lands  was  being  determined. 
This  we  see  —  all  too  plainly  perhaps  —  if  we  read  the  books  that  year  by 
year  men  still  are  writing  of  Queen  Mary  and  her  surroundings.  The 
patient  analysis  of  those  love  letters  in  the  casket  may  yet  be  perturbed 
by  thoughts  about  religion.  Nor  is  the  religious  the  only  interest.  A 
new  nation,  a  British  nation,  was  in  the  making. 

We  offer  no  excuse  for  having  as  j^et  said  little  of  Scotland. 
Called  upon  to  play  for  some  years  a  foremost  part  in  the  great  drama, 
her  entry  upon  tlie  stage  of  modern  history  is  late  and  sudden.  In  such 
phrases  there  must  indeed  be  some  untruth,  for  history  is  not  drama. 
The   annals    of   Scotland   may  be  so  written   that   the   story  will   be 

550 


Entry  of  Scotland  into  modem  history  551 

continuous  enough.  We  may  see  the  explosion  of  1559  as  the  effect 
of  causes  that  had  long  been  at  work.  We  might  chronicle  the  remote 
beginnings  of  heresy  and  the  first  glimmers  of  the  New  Learning.  All 
those  signs  of  the  times  that  we  have  seen  elsewhere  in  capital  letters  we 
might  see  here  in  minuscule.  Also,  it  would  not  escape  us  that,  though 
in  the  days  of  Luther  and  Calvin  resistance  to  the  English  and  their 
obstinately  impolitic  claim  of  suzerainty  still  seemed  the  vital  thread 
of  Scottish  national  existence,  inherited  enmity  was  being  enfeebled, 
partly  by  the  multiplying  perfidies  of  venal  nobles  and  the  increasing 
wealth  of  their  paymasters,  and  partly  also  by  the  accumulating  proofs 
that  in  the  new  age  a  Scotland  which  lived  only  to  help  France  and 
liamper  England  would  herself  be  a  poor  little  Power  among  the 
nations  :  doomed,  not  only  to  occasional  Floddens  and  Pinkies,  but  to 
continuous  misery,  anarchy,  and  obscurity. 

All  this  deserves,  and  finds,  full  treatment  at  the  hands  of  the 
liistorians  of  Scotland.  They  will  also  sufficiently  warn  us  that  the 
events  of  1560  leave  a  great  deal  unchanged.  Faith  may  be  changed  ; 
works  are  much  what  they  were,  especiall}^  the  works  of  the  magnates. 
The  blood-feud  is  no  less  a  blood-feud  because  one  family  calls  itself 
Catholic  and  another  calls  itself  Protestant.  The  "  band  "  is  no  less  a 
"  band"  because  it  is  styled  a  "Covenant"  and  makes  free  with  holy 
names.  A  King  shall  be  kidnapped,  and  a  King  shall  be  murdered,  as  of 
old  :  —  it  is  the  custom  of  the  country.  What  is  new  is  that  f arsighted 
men  all  Europe  over,  not  only  at  London  and  at  Paris,  but  at  Rome  and 
at  Geneva,  should  take  interest  in  these  barbarous  deeds,  this  customary 
turmoil. 

Continuity  there  had  been  and  to  spare.  In  that  mournful  pro- 
cession of  the  five  Jameses  there  is  no  break  (1406-1542).  The  last  of 
them  is  engaged  in  the  old  task,  and  failing  as  his  forebears  failed.  It  is 
picturesque  ;  sometimes  it  is  heroic  ;  often  it  is  pathetic  ;  but  it  is  never 
modern.  Modern  history  sees  it  as  a  funeral  procession  burying  a  dead 
time,  and  we  are  silent  while  it  passes.  In  a  few  sentences  we  make  our 
way  towards  the  momentous  years. 

Scotland  had  been  slow  to  emerge  from  the  Middle  Age.  A  country 
which  of  all  others  demanded  strong  and  steady  government  had  been 
plagued  by  a  series  of  infant  Kings  and  contested  Regencies.  In  the 
sixteenth  century  its  barons  still  belonged  to  the  twelfth,  despite  a  thin 
veneer  of  French  manners.  Its  institutions  were  rudimentary  ;  its 
Parliaments  were  feudal  assemblies.  Since  the  close  of  the  War  of 
Independence  there  had  been  hardly  anything  tliat  could  properly  be 
called  constitutional  growth.  Sometimes  there  was  a  little  imitation  of 
England  and  sometimes  a  little  imitation  of  France,  the  King  appearing 
as  a  more  or  less  radical  reformer.  But  the  King  died  young,  leaving 
an  infant  son,  and  his  feudatories  had  no  desire  for  reformation.     The 


552  Retrospect  of  Scottish  history 

Scottish  monarchy,  if  monarchy  it  may  be  called,  was  indeed  strictly 
limited  ;  but  the  limits  were  set  much  rather  by  the  poAver  of  certain 
noble  families  and  their  numerous  retainers  than  by  an  assembly  of 
Estates  expressing  the  constant  will  of  an  organised  community.  The 
prelates,  lords,  and  represented  boroughs  formed  but  one  Chamber. 
Attempts  to  induce  the  lesser  tenants-in-chief  to  choose  representatives 
who  would  resemble  the  English  knights  of  the  shire  had  been  abortive, 
and  a  bad  habit  prevailed  of  delegating  the  work  of  a  Parliament  to  a 
committee  known  as  "the  Lords  of  the  Articles. "  Normally  the  assembly 
of  Estates  was  but  the  registrar  of  foregone  conclusions.  In  troublous 
times  (and  the  times  were  often  troublous)  the  faction  that  was  in  power 
would  hold  a  Parliament,  and  the  other  faction  would  prudently  abstain 
from  attendance.  When  in  1560  an  unusually  full,  free,  and  important 
Parliament  was  held  for  the  reformation  of  religion,  an  elementary 
question  concerning  the  right  of  the  minor  barons  to  sit  and  vote  was 
still  debatable,  and  for  many  years  afterwards  those  who  desire  to  see 
the  true  contribution  of  Scotland  to  the  history  of  representative 
institutions  will  look,  not  to  the  blighted  and  stunted  conclave  of  the 
three  Estates  with  its  titular  Bishops  and  Abbots  commendatory,  but 
to  the  fresh  and  vigorous  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 

Steady  taxation  and  all  that  it  implies  had  been  out  of  the  question. 
The  Scots  were  ready  to  fight  for  their  King,  unless  they  happened  to  be 
fighting  against  him  ;  but  they  would  not  provide  him  with  a  revenue 
adequate  for  the  maintenance  of  public  order.  He  was  expected  "  to 
live  of  his  own  "  in  medieval  fashion,  and  his  own  was  not  enough  to 
raise  him  high  above  his  barons.  Moreover,  Douglases  and  Hamiltons 
and  others,  hereditary  sheriffs  and  possessors  of  "  regalities,"  were  slow 
to  forget  that  these  crowned  stewards  of  Scotland  were  no  better  than 
themselves.  What  had  "  come  with  a  lass  "  might  "  go  with  a  lass,"  and 
was  in  no  wise  mysterious.  We  shall  see  Queen  Mary,  widow  of  a  King 
of  France,  giving  her  hand  first  to  a  Lennox-Stewart  whose  mother  is 
a  Douglas  and  then  to  a  Hepburn,  while  the  heir  presumptive  to  the 
throne  is  the  head  of  the  Hamiltons.  We  shall  see  Queen  Elizabeth 
having  trouble  with  northern  earls,  with  Percies  and  Nevilles,  who  set 
up  an  altar  which  she  had  cast  down,  and  belike  would  have  cast  down 
an  altar  which  she  had  set  up  ;  but  their  power  to  disturb  England  was 
as  nothing  to  the  power  of  disturbing  Scotland  which  was  exercised  by 
those  near  neighbours  and  like-minded  fellows  of  theirs  who  joined  the 
bellicose  Congregation  of  Jesus  Christ.  And  even  in  the  briefest  sketch 
we  must  not  omit  to  notice  that,  as  beyond  England  lay  Scotland,  so 
beyond  the  historic  Scotland  lay  the  unhistoric  land  of  "the  savages." 
The  very  means  that  had  been  taken  by  Scottish  Kings  to  make 
Scotsmen  of  these  "  red-shanks  "  and  to  bring  these  savages  within  the 
pale  of  history  had  raised  up  new  feudatories  of  almost  royal  rank  and 
of  more  than   baronial   turbulence.     Thenceforward,  the    King  would 


Backwardness  of  Scotland  553 

have  to  reckon,  not  only  with  an  Albany,  an  Angus,  and  an  Arran, 
but  also  with  an  Argyll  and  with  a  Huntly.  When  we  see  these 
things  we  think  of  the  dark  age  :  of  Charles  the  Simple  and  Rolf  the 
Pirate. 

Neither  valorous  feats  of  arms  which  overtaxed  a  people's  strength 
nor  a  superabundance  of  earls  and  barons  should  conceal  from  us  the 
nakedness  of  the  land.  It  is  more  than  probable  that  in  the  middle 
of  the  sixteenth  century  the  whole  of  the  Scottish  nation,  including  un- 
tamable Highlanders,  was  not  too  large  to  be  commodiously  housed  in 
the  Glasgow  of  to-day.  Life  was  short,  and  death  was  violent.  It  is 
true  that  many  hopeful  signs  of  increasing  prosperity  and  enlightenment 
are  visible  in  the  days  of  James  IV  (1488-1513).  But  those  days  ended 
at  Flodden.  The  flowers  of  the  forest  were  once  more  mown  down. 
The  hand  went  back  upon  the  dial  towards  poverty  and  barbarity. 
An  aptitude  for  letters  we  may  see.  Of  a  brief  springtime  of  song 
Scotland  may  fairly  boast,  for  as  jQt  no  icy  wind  was  blowing  from 
Geneva.  Universities  we  may  see  :  more  universities  indeed  than  the 
country  could  well  support.  By  a  memorable,  if  futile.  Act  of 
Parliament  James  IV  attempted  to  drive  the  sons  of  the  gentry  into 
the  grammar-schools.  But  an  all-pervading  lack  of  wealth  and  of 
the  habits  that  make  for  wealth  was  an  impediment  to  every  good 
endeavour.  The  printing  press  had  been  in  no  hurry  to  reach  England 
(1477)  ;  but  thirty  years  more  elapsed  before  it  entered  Scotland.  An 
aptitude  for  jurisprudence  we  might  infer  from  subsequent  history  ; 
but  it  is  matter  of  inference.  Of  lawyers  who  were  not  ecclesiastics,  of 
temporal  lawyers  comparable  to  the  professionally  learned  justices  and 
Serjeants  of  England,  Ave  can  hardly  read  a  word.  When  at  length 
James  V  founded  the  College  of  Justice  (1532),  half  the  seats  in  it,  and 
indeed  one  more,  were  allotted  to  the  clergy,  and  in  later  days  foreign 
science  was  imported  from  the  continental  universities  to  supply  the 
deficiencies  of  an  undeveloped  system.  Scotland  had  been  no  place 
for  lawyers,  and  the  temporal  law  that  might  be  had  there,  though  it 
came  of  an  excellent  stock,  had  for  the  more  part  been  of  the  bookless 
kind.  And  as  with  jurisprudence,  so  with  statesmanship.  The  Scottish 
statesman  who  was  not  a  Bishop  Avas  a  man  of  a  new  kind  when 
Lethington  began  his  correspondence  with  Cecil  ;  for,  even  if  we  employ 
a  medieval  standard,  we  can  hardly  attribute  statecraft  or  policy  to  the 
Albanys  and  Anguses  and  Arrans. 

In  this  poor  and  sparsely  peopled  country  the  Church  was  wealthy  ; 
the  clergy  were  numerous,  laic,  and  lazy.  The  names  of  "  dumb  dogs  " 
and  "  idle  bellies  "  which  the  new  preachers  fixed  upon  them  had  not 
been  unearned.  Nowhere  else  was  there  a  seed-plot  better  prepared 
for  revolutionary  ideas  of  a  religious  sort.  Nowhere  else  would  an 
intelligible  Bible  be  a  newer  book,  or  a  sermon  kindle  stranger  fires. 
Nowhere   else  would   the   pious   champions  of  the  Catholic  faith   be 


554:  The  Church  in  Scotland 

compelled  to  say  so  much  that  was  evil  of  those  who  should  have  been 
their  pastors.  Abuses  which  had  been  superficial  and  sporadic  in 
England  were  widely  spread  and  deeply  rooted  in  the  northern  kingdom. 
In  particular,  the  commendation  of  ecclesiastical  benefices  to  laymen, 
to  babies,  had  become  a  matter  of  course.  The  Lord  James  Stewart, 
the  King's  base-born  son,  who  at  the  critical  moment  is  Prior  of 
St  Andrews  and  sits  in  Parliament  as  a  member  of  the  spiritual  Estate, 
is  a  typical  figure.  The  corslet  had  "  clattered  "  beneath  the  Arch- 
bishop's cassock,  and  when  Bishops  and  Abbots  lie  among  the  dead  on 
Flodden  field  they  have  done  no  less  but  no  more  than  their  duty.  We 
say  that  the  Scottish  Church  was  rich,  and  so  it  nominally  was,  for  the 
kirk-lands  were  broad  ;  but  when  the  Protestant  ministers,  much  to  their 
own  disappointment,  had  to  be  content  with  a  very  small  fraction  of 
the  old  ecclesiastical  revenues,  they  had  probably  secured  a  larger  share 
than  had  for  a  long  time  past  been  devoted  to  any  purpose  more  spirit- 
ual than  the  sustentation  of  royal,  episcopal,  and  baronial  families.  We 
exclaim  against  the  greedy  nobles  whose  lust  for  the  kirk-lands  is  one 
of  the  operative  forces  in  the  history  of  the  Scottish  Reformation. 
They  might  have  said  that  they  were  only  rearranging  on  a  reasonable 
and  modern  basis  what  had  long  been  for  practical  purposes  the  property 
of  their  class.  Their  doings  send  back  our  thoughts  to  far-off  Carolin- 
gian  days,  when  the  "  benefice "  became  the  hereditary  fief.  To  the 
King  it  was,  no  doubt,  convenient  that  the  power  of  those  nobles  who 
would  leave  heirs  should  be  balanced  by  the  power  of  other  nobles, 
called  prelates,  whose  children  would  not  be  legitimate.  But  such  a 
system  could  not  be  stable,  and  might  at  any  time  provoke  an  over- 
whelming outcry  for  its  destruction,  if  ever  one  bold  man  raised  his 
voice  against  it.  Men  who  are  not  themselves  very  moral  can  feel 
genuine  indignation  when  they  detect  immorality  among  those  who, 
though  no  w^orse  than  themselves,  pretend  to  superior  holiness.  Prel- 
ates, and  even  primates  of  Scotland,  who  were  bastards  and  the  beget- 
ters of  bastards,  were  the  principal  forerunners  and  coadjutors  of  John 
Knox  ;  and  unfortunately  they  were  debarred  by  professional  rules  from 
pleading  that  they,  or  the  best  among  them,  were  in  truth  the  respec- 
table husbands  of  virtuous  wives. 

LoUardy  too  there  had  been,  and  in  some  corners  of  the  land  it  had 
never  been  thoroughly  extirpated.  Also  there  had  been  a  little  burning, 
but  far  from  enough  to  accustom  the  Scots  to  the  sight  of  a  heretic  tor- 
tured by  the  flames.  Then  the  German  leaven  began  to  work,  and  from 
1528  onwards  a  few  Lutherans  were  burnt.  The  protomartyr  was  Pat- 
rick Hamilton,  the  young  and  well-born  Abbot  of  Feme.  Like  many 
another  Scottish  youth  he  had  been  at  the  University  of  Paris.  After- 
wards he  had  made  a  pilgrimage,  if  not  to  Wittenberg,  at  all  events  to 
Marburg.  It  is  characteristic  of  time  and  place  that  historians  have  to 
consider  whether  a  feud  between  Douglases  and  Hamiltons  counts  for 


1542]  Death  of  James  V. — Regency  of  Arran 


nothing  in  his  martyrdom.  "  The  reek  of  Patrick  Hamilton,"  we  are 
told,  infected  many  ;  and  we  can  well  believe  it.  The  College  of  St 
Leonard  was  tainted  Avith  humanism  and  new  theology.  Young  men 
fled  from  Scotland  and  made  fame  elsewhere.  Such  were  Alexander 
Aless,  who  as  Alesius  became  the  friend  of  Melanchthon,  and  John 
Macalpine,  who  as  Machabaeus  professed  divinity  at  Copenhagen. 
Such  also  was  George  Buchanan,  the  humanist  and  the  Calvinist,  the 
tutor  and  the  calumniator  of  Queen  Mary.  And  we  see  the  Wedder- 
burns  w^ho  are  teaching  Scotsmen  to  sing  ballads  of  a  novel  kind,  "good 
and  godly  ballads,"  but  such  as  priests  are  loth  to  hear.  And  we  see 
Sir  David  Lindsay,  the  herald,  the  poet,  the  King's  friend,  scourging  the 
lives  and  sometimes  the  beliefs  of  the  clergy  with  verses  which  rich  and 
poor  will  know  by  heart.  In  short,  there  was  combustible  material 
lying  about  in  large  quantities,  and  sparks  were  flying. 

But  the  day  of  revolt  was  long  delayed.  What  held  in  check  the 
rebellious  and  even  the  Reforming  forces,  was  the  best  of  Scottish  tradi- 
tions, the  undying  distrust  of  an  England  which  claimed  an  overlordship; 
and  in  the  days  of  Henry  VIK  no  wholesomer  tradition  could  there  be. 
His  father  had  schemed  for  amity  by  w^ay  of  matrimonial  alliance,  and 
Margaret  Tudor  had  become  the  wife  and  mother  of  Scottish  Kings. 
It  w^as  plain  that  in  the  age  of  great  monarchies  England  would  be 
feeble  so  long  as  she  had  a  hostile  Scotland  behind  her.  But  the 
Tudor  would  not  see  that  he  could  not  annex  Scotland,  or  that  a 
merely  annexed  Scotland  would  still  be  the  old  enemy.  Just  as  in  the 
days  of  the  Great  Schism  England  had  acknowledged  one,  and  Scotland 
the  other,  of  the  rival  Popes,  so  in  the  new  days  of  a  greater  schism 
James  V  became  the  better  Catholic  because  his  bullying  uncle  had 
broken  with  Rome.  As  was  natural  for  a  King  of  Scots,  he  leant  upon 
the  support  of  the  clergy,  and  thereby  he  offended  his  barons.  They 
failed  him  in  his  hour  of  need.  After  the  shameful  rout  at  Solway 
Moss,  he  turned  his  face  to  the  wall  and  died,  a  worn-out  desperate  man 
at  the  age  of  thirty  years  (December  14,  15-42). 

His  wife,  Mary  of  Lorraine,  the  sister  of  those  Guises  \\\\o  were  to 
be  all-powerful  in  France,  had  just  borne  him  a  daughter  :  she  was  the 
ill-fated  Mary  Stewart  (December  8,  1542).  Once  more,  a  baby  was  to 
be  crowned  in  Scotland.  Next  to  her  in  liereditary  succession  stood  a 
remote  cousin,  the  head  of  the  House  of  Hamilton,  James  Earl  of  Arran, 
the  Chatelherault  of  after  times.  But  his  right  depended  on  the  validity 
of  a  divorce  which  some  might  call  in  question  ;  and  Matthew  Stewart, 
Earl  of  Lennox,  had  pretensions.  At  the  head  of  the  Scottish  clergy 
stood  the  able,  though  dissolute,  Archbishop  of  St  Andrews,  Cardinal 
David  Beton.  For  a  moment  it  seemed  as  if  a  Reformed  religion,  or  some 
northern  version  of  Henricanism,  was  to  have  its  chance.  The  nobles 
chose  Arran  for  Regent  ;  many  of  them  envied  the  clergy  ;  many  w^ere 
in  Henry's  pay.     Arran  for  a  while  inclined  towards  England  ;  he  kept 


556  Murder  of  Beton.  —  Battle  of  Pinkie         [1543-7 

heretical  chaplains  ;  a  Parliament,  in  spite  of  clerical  protest,  declared 
that  the  Bible  might  be  read  in  the  vulgar  tongue.  Beton  had  been 
imprisoned  ;  a  charge  of  falsifying  the  late  King's  will  had  been  brought 
ao-ainst  him.  Henry's  opportunity  had  come  :  the  little  Queen  was  to 
be  wedded  to  Edward  Tudor.  But  Henry  was  the  worst  of  unionists. 
He  bribed,  but  he  also  blustered,  and  let  all  men  see  that  Scotland  must 
be  his  by  foul  means  if  not  by  fair.  A  treaty  was  signed  (July  1,  1543)  ; 
but  within  six  months  (December  11)  it  was  repudiated  by  the  Scots. 
Meanwhile  the  feeble  Arran,  under  pressure  of  an  interdict,  had  recon- 
ciled himself  with  Beton  and  had  abjured  his  heresies.  The  old  league 
with  France  was  re-established.  Henry  then  sent  fleet  and  army. 
Edinburgh  was  burnt  (May,  1514).  The  Lowlands  were  ravaged  with 
pitiless  ferocity.  The  Scottish  resistance  was  feeble.  There  were  many 
traitors.  The  powerful  Douglases  ^Dlayed  a  double  part.  Lennox  was 
for  the  English,  and  was  rewarded  with  the  hand  of  Henry's  niece, 
Margaret  Douglas.  But  Scotland  could  not  be  annexed,  the  precious 
child  could  not  be  captured,  and  Henry  could  not  yet  procure  the 
murder  of  the  Cardinal. 

Patriotism  and  Catholicism  were  now  all  one.  Not  but  that  there 
were  Protestants.  One  George  Wishart,  who  had  been  in  Switzerland 
and  at  Cambridge,  was  preaching  the  Gospel,  and  some  (but  this  is  no 
better  than  a  guess)  would  identify  him  with  a  Wishart  who  was  plotting 
Beton's  murder.  He  had  powerful  protectors,  and  among  his  disciples 
Avas  a  man  of  middle  age,  born  in  1505,  who  as  yet  had  done  nothing 
memorable  ;  he  was  priest,  notary,  private  tutor  ;  his  name  was  John 
Knox.  Wishart  was  arrested,  tried  and  burnt  for  heresy  (March  2, 1546). 
Thereupon  a  band  of  assassins  burst  into  the  castle  of  St  Andrews  and 
slew  Beton  (May  29,  1546).  The  leaders  were  well-born  men,  Leslies, 
Kirkaldys,  Melvilles.  Their  motives  were  various.  Ancient  feuds  and 
hopes  of  English  gold  were  mingled  with  hatred  for  a  "  blood}^  butcher 
of  the  saints  of  God."  They  held  the  castle  and  the  town.  The  ruffianly 
and  the  godly  flocked  in.  There  was  a  strange  mixture  of  debauch- 
ery and  gospel  in  the  St  Andrews  of  those  days.  John  Knox  appeared 
there  and  was  "  called  "  to  preach  to  the  congregation  ;  reluctantly  (so  he 
says)  he  accepted  the  call.  The  Regent  had  laid  siege,  but  had  failed. 
At  length  came  F'rench  ships  with  requisite  artiller3^  The  besieged 
capitulated  (July,  1547);  they  were  to  be  taken  to  France  and  there 
liberated.  John  Knox  was  shipped  off  Avith  the  rest,  and  was  kept  in 
the  galleys  for  nineteen  months,  to  meditate  on  faith  that  justifies. 

Meanwhile  Henry  of  England  had  died  (January  28, 1547)  ;  but  the 
Protector  Somerset  was  bent  on  marrying  his  boy  King  to  the  girl 
Queen.  He  had  excellent  projects  in  his  head.  He  could  speak  of  a 
time  when  England  and  Scotland  would  be  absorbed  and  forgotten  in 
Great  Britain  ;  but  the  French  also  were  busy  around  Mary  Stewart.  So 
he  led  an  army  northwards,  and  fought  the  battle  of  Pinkie  (September  10, 


1547-54]  Regency  of  Mar  ij  of  Low  able  557 

1547).  No  more  decisive  defeat  could  have  been  inflicted  on  the  Scot- 
tish host  and  the  Britannic  idea.  Other  events  called  Somerset  home. 
The  Scots  could  always  be  crushed  in  the  field,  but  Scotland  could  not 
be  annexed.  Then  came  help  from  the  good  friend  France,  in  tlie  shape 
of  French,  German,  and  Italian  troops;  the  English  employed  Germans 
and  Spaniards.  A  Parliament  decided  to  accept  a  French  proposal 
(July,  1548)  :  the  Queen  of  Scots  should  marry,  not  the  English  King, 
but  young  Francis  the  Dauphin,  and  meantime  should  be  placed  out 
of  harm's  way.  She  was  shipped  off  at  Dumbarton,  and  landed  in 
Britanny  (August  13,  1548)  to  pass  a  happy  girlhood  in  a  lettered  and 
luxurious  Court.  The  war  was  prosecuted  with  a  bloodthirst  new  in 
the  savage  annals  of  the  borders  ;  it  was  a  Avar  fought  by  mercenary 
Almains.  When  peace  was  signed  in  1550,  England  had  gained  noth- 
ing, and  upon  the  surface  (though  only  upon  the  surface)  Scotland  was 
as  Catholic  as  ever  it  had  been,  grateful  to  France,  bitterly  resentful 
against  heretical  England. 

During  the  struggle  Mary  of  Lorraine  had  borne  herself  bravely ; 
she  appeared  as  the  guiding  spirit  of  a  national  resistance.  She  or  her 
advising  kinsfolk  were  soon  to  make,  though  in  less  brutal  sort,  the 
mistake  that  Henry  VIII  had  made,  and  this  time  it  was  to  be  irre- 
trievable. During  a  visit  to  France  (September,  1550-October,  1551) 
she  schemed  with  her  brothers  and  the  French  King.  She  was  to  take 
Arran's  place  as  Regent ;  he  had  been  compensated  with  the  duchy  (no 
empty  title)  of  Chatelherault,  and  his  eldest  son  (who  now  becomes  the 
Arran  of  our  story)  was  to  command  the  French  King's  Scots  guard. 
The  arrangement  was  not  perfected  until  1554,  for  "  the  second  person 
in  the  kingdom  "  was  loth  to  relax  his  hold  on  a  land  of  which  he  might 
soon  be  King ;  but  the  French  influence  was  strong,  and  he  yielded. 
Mary  of  Lorraine  was  no  bad  ruler  for  Scotland ;  but  still  the  Scots 
could  not  help  seeing  that  she  was  ruling  in  the  interest  of  a  foreign 
Power.  Moreover,  there  had  been  a  change  in  the  religious  environ- 
ment :  Mary  Tudor  had  become  Queen  of  England  (July  6, 1553).  John 
Knox,  who  after  his  sojourn  in  the  French  galleys  had  been  one  of 
King  Edward's  select  preachers  and  had  narrowly  escaped  the  bishopric 
of  Rochester,  was  fleeing  to  Geneva  ;  and  thence  he  went  to  P'rankfort, 
there  to  quarrel  with  his  fellow  exile  Dr  Cox  over  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  In  Scotland  Catholicism  had  been  closely  allied  with  patriot- 
ism ;  but  when  England  became  Catholic,  Protestant  preachers  found 
refuge  in  Scotland.  The  King  of  France  was  cherishing  the  intrigues  of 
English  heretics  against  the  Spanish  Queen  ;  Mary  of  Lorraine  was  no 
fanatic,  and  her  policy  was  incompatible  with  stern  repression.  She  was 
trying  to  make  Scotland  more  securely  French ;  the  task  was  delicate  ; 
and  she  needed  the  support  of  nobles  who  had  little  love  for  the  clergy. 
A  few  high  offices  were  given  to  Frenchmen  ;  a  few  French  soldiers  were 
kept  in  the  fortresses ;  they  were  few,  but  enough  to  scatter  whole  hosts 


558  John  Knox  cmcl  the  Congregation  [i5o5-8 

of  undrilled  Scots.  An  attempt  to  impose  a  tax  for  the  support  of 
troops  was  resisted,  and  the  barons  showed  a  strange  reluctance  to  fight 
the  English.  At  length  the  time  came  for  the  Queen's  marriage  (April 
24,  1558).  The  Scottish  statesmen  had  laboriously  drawn  a  treaty 
which  should  guard  the  independence  of  their  realm  and  the  rights  of 
the  House  of  Hamilton.  This  was  signed  ;  but  a  few  days  earlier  Mary 
Stewart  had  set  her  hand  to  other  documents  which  purported  to  convey 
Scotland  for  good  and  all  to  the  King  of  France.  We  may  find  excuses 
for  the  girl ;  but,  if  treason  can  be  committed  by  a  sovereign,  she  was 
a  traitor.  She  had  treated  Scotland  as  a  chattel.  The  act  was  secret ; 
but  the  Scots  guessed  much  and  were  uneasy. 

In  the  meantime  Calvinism,  for  it  was  Calvinism  now,  was  spreading. 
After  the  quarrels  at  Frankfort,  Knox  had  gone  back  to  Geneva  and  had  sat 
at  the  master's  feet.  In  1555  he  returned  to  Scotland,  no  mere  preacher, 
but  an  organiser  also.  He  went  through  the  country,  and  "  Churches  " 
of  the  new  order  sprang  into  being  where  he  went.  Powerful  nobles 
began  to  listen,  such  as  Lord  Lome,  who  was  soon  to  be  Earl  of  Argyll, 
and  the  Queen's  bastard  brother,  the  Lord  James  Stewart,  who  was  to 
be  Earl  of  Moray  and  Regent.  And  politicians  listened  also,  such  as 
William  Maitland,  the  young  laird  of  Lethington.  Knox  was  summoned 
before  an  ecclesiastical  Court  (May  15,  1556)  ;  but  apparently  at  the  last 
moment  the  hearts  of  the  clergy  failed  them,  and  the  prosecution  was 
abandoned.  It  was  evident  that  he  had  powerful  supporters,  especially 
the  Earl  of  Glencairn.  Moreover  the  natural  leader  of- the  clergy,  John 
Hamilton,  the  Primate  of  Scotland,  was  a  bastard  brother  of  Chatel- 
herault  and,  as  a  Hamilton,  looked  with  suspicion  on  the  French  policy 
of  Mary  of  Lorraine,  so  that  the  chiefs  of  Church  and  State  were  not 
united.  However,  Knox  had  no  mind  for  martyrdom ;  and  so,  after 
sending  to  the  Regent  an  admonitory  letter,  which  she  cast  aside  with 
scornful  words,  he  again  departed  for  Geneva  (July,  1556).  Then  the 
Bishops  summoned  him  once  more ;   but  only  his  effigy  could  be  burnt. 

The  preaching  went  on.  In  the  last  days  of  1557  the  first  "  Cove- 
nant" was  signed.  "The  Congregation  of  Jesus  Christ,"  of  which 
Argyll,  Glencairn,  and  other  great  men  were  members,  stood  out  in 
undisguised  hostility  to  that  "  congregation  of  Satan  "  which  styled  itself 
the  Catholic  Church.  They  demanded  that  King  Edward's  Prayer  Book 
(which  was  good  enough  for  them  if  not  for  their  absent  inspirer)  should 
be  read  in  all  the  churches.  The  Regent  was  perplexed ;  the  French 
marriage  had  not  yet  been  secured ;  but  she  did  not  prevent  the  prel- 
ates from  burning  one  Walter  Milne,  who  was  over  eighty  years  of  age 
(April,  1558).  He  was  the  last  of  the  Protestant  martyrs  ;  they  had 
not  been  numerous,  even  when  judged  by  the  modest  English  standard ; 
fanaticism  was  not  among  the  many  faults  of  the  Scottish  prelates ;  but 
for  this  reason  his  cruel  death  made  the  deeper  mark.  On  St  Giles' 
day  (September  1)  in  1558  that  Saint's  statue  was  being  carried  through 


1558]  Accession  of  Elizabeth  559 

the  town  of  Edinburgh,  of  which  he  was  the  patron.  Under  the  eyes  of 
the  Regent  the  priests  were  rabbled  and  the  idol  was  smashed  in  pieces. 
It  was  plain  that  the  next  year  would  be  stormy ;  and  at  this  crisis  the 
face  of  England  was  once  more  changed. 

A  few  weeks  later  Henry  Percy,  brother  of  the  Earl  of  Northumber- 
land, was  talking  with  the  Duke  of  Chatelherault.  God,  said  the 
Englishman,  has  sent  you  a  true  and  Christian  religion.  We  are  on  the 
point  of  receiving  the  same  boon.  Why  should  you  and  we  be  enemies  — 
we  who  are  hardly  out  of  our  servitude  to  Spain  ;  you  who  are  being 
brought  into  servitude  by  France  ?  The  liberties  of  Scotland  are  in 
jeopardy  and  the  rights  of  the  Hamiltons.  Might  we  not  unite  in  the 
maintenance  of  God's  Word  and  national  independence?  This  is  the 
ideal  which  springs  to  light  in  the  last  months  of  1558  :  —  deliverance 
from  the  toils  of  foreign  potentates  ;  amity  between  two  sister  nations  ; 
union  in  a  pure  religion.  The  Duke  himself  was  a  waverer ;  his  duchy 
lay  in  France ;  he  is  the  Antoine  de  Bourbon  of  Scottish  history ;  but 
his  son  the  Earl  of  Arran  had  lately  installed  a  Protestant  preacher  at 
Chatelherault  and  was  in  correspondence  with  Calvin.  Percy  reported 
this  interview  to  an  English  lady  who  had  once  been  offered  to  the  Duke 
as  a  bride  for  Arran  and  had  just  become  Queen  Elizabeth. 

Mary,  Queen  of  England  and  Spain,  died  on  the  17th  of  November, 
1558.  The  young  woman  at  Hatfield,  who  knew  that  her  sister's  days 
were  numbered,  had  made  the  great  choice.  Ever  since  May  it  had 
been  clear  that  she  would  soon  be  Queen.  The  Catholics  doubted  and 
feared,  but  had  no  other  candidate ;  King  Philip  was  hopeful.  So 
Elizabeth  was  prepared.  William  Cecil  was  to  be  her  secretary,  and 
England  was  to  be  Protestant.  Her  choice  may  surprise  us.  When  a 
few  months  later  she  is  told  by  the  Bishop  of  Aquila  that  she  has  been 
imprudent,  he  seems  for  once  to  be  telling  the  truth. 

Had  there  been  no  religious  dissension,  her  title  to  the  throne  would 
hardly  have  been  contested  among  Englishmen.  To  say  nothing  of  her 
father's  will,  she  had  an  unrepealed  statute  in  her  favour.  Divines 
and  lawyers  might  indeed  have  found  it  difficult  to  maintain  her  legiti- 
mate birth.  Parliament  had  lately  declared  that  her  father  was  lawfully 
married  to  Catharine  of  Aragon,  and  with  this  good  Catholics  would 
agree.  But  there  was  another  scandal,  of  which  good  Protestants  might 
take  account.  Elizabeth's  godfather,  the  Henrican  Archbishop  and 
Protestant  martyr,  had  adjudged  that  Henry  was  never  married  to  Anne 
Boleyn.  His  reasons  died  with  him;  but  something  bad,  something 
nameless,  might  be  guessed.  It  is  sometimes  said  that  Elizabetli's 
birth  condemned  her  to  be  Protestant  or  bastard.  But  it  would  be 
truer  to  say  that,  had  she  cared  much  about  legitimacy,  she  would  liave 
made  her  peace  with  Rome.  Hints  came  to  her  thence,  that  the  pleni- 
tude of  power  can  set  these  little  matters  straight  for  the  benefit  of  well- 


560  Elizahetli's  title  and  her  religion  [i558 

disposed  princes ;  and  in  papal  eyes  Cranmer's  sentence  would  have  been 
a  prejudice  in  her  favour.  But  pure  legitimism,  the  legitimism  of  the 
divine  entail,  was  yet  in  its  infancy,  and  neither  Protestant  nor  Catholic 
was  bound  to  deny  that  a  statute  of  the  realm  may  set  a  bastard  on 
the  throne  of  William  the  Conqueror.  For  the  people  at  large  it  would 
be  enough  that  the  Lady  Elizabeth  was  the  only  living  descendant  of 
old  King  Henry,  and  that  beyond  her  lay  civil  war.  The  thin  stream  of 
Tudor  blood  was  running  dry.  Henry's  will  (but  its  validity  might  be 
questioned)  had  postponed  the  issue  of  his  elder  to  that  of  his  younger 
sister :  in  other  words,  the  House  of  Scotland  to  the  House  of  Suffolk. 
Mary  Stewart  was  born  in  Scotland ;  she  could  not  have  inherited  an 
acre  of  English  land,  and  it  was  highly  doubtful  whether  English  law 
would  give  the  crown  to  an  alien  who  was  the  child  of  two  aliens. 
Neither  her  grandmother's  second  marriage,  namely  that  with  Archibald 
Douglas  (whence  sprang  Lady  Lennox  and  her  son  Lord  Darnley),  nor 
the  marriage  of  Mary  Tudor  with  Charles  Brandon  (whence  sprang 
Greys  and  Stanleys)  was  beyond  reproach ;  — few  marriages  were  beyond 
reproach  in  those  days  of  loose  morals  and  conniving  law.  John  Knox 
at  Geneva  had,  to  Calvin's  regret,  just  blown  a  first  blast  of  the  trumpet 
against  the  monstrous  regiment  of  women,  and  unfortunately,  though 
the  tone  was  new,  the  tune  was  not.  The  Scottish  gospeller  could  only 
repeat  the  biblical  and  other  arguments  that  had  been  used  a  century 
ago  by  that  Lancastrian  sage.  Chief  Justice  Fortescue.  No  woman  had 
sat  upon  the  English  throne,  save  Mary,  and  she  (it  might  be  said)  was 
a  statutory  Queen.  Many  people  thought  that  next  in  right  to  Elizabeth 
stood  Henry  Hastings,  who  was  no  Tudor  but  a  Yorkist  ;  and  already  in 
1565  Philip  of  Spain  was  thinking  of  his  own  descent  from  Edward  IIL 
Thus  Elizabeth's  statutory  title  stood  between  England  and  wars  of  the 
roses  which  would  also  be  wars  of  religion. 

At  this  moment,  however,  she  put  a  difference  of  creed  between 
herself  and  the  Daupldness.  It  may  be  that  in  any  case  Henry  II  of 
France,  who  was  in  want  of  arguments  for  the  retention  of  Calais,  would 
have  disputed  Elizabeth's  legitimacy;  it  was  said  that  he  had  been 
prepared  to  dispute  the  legitimacy  of  her  Catholic  sister.  But  had 
Elizabeth  been  Catholic,  the  French  and  Scottish  claim  to  her  throne 
would  have  merely  been  an  enemy's  insult:  an  insult  to  England,  a 
challenge  to  Spain.  As  it  was,  Henry  might  lay  a  strong  case  before 
the  Pope  and  the  Catholic  world :  Elizabeth  was  bastard  and  heretic 
to  boot,  and  at  this  moment  Paul  IV  was  questioning  Ferdinand's 
election  to  the  Empire  because  some  of  his  Electors  were  Lutherans. 
That  heretics  are  not  to  rule  was  no  new  principle ;  the  Counts  of 
Toulouse  had  felt  its  edge  in  the  old  Albigensian  days. 

After  the  fall  of  Calais  in  January  (1558)  England  was  panic-stricken. 
The  French  were  coming  ;  the  Scots  were  coming  ;  Danes  and  Hanseats 
were   coming.     German   troops   were   being   hastily  hired  to  protect 


1558]  Elizabeth  and  foreign  Powers  561 

Northumberland.  Philip's  envoy,  the  Count  of  Feria,  saw  incompetence 
everywhere.  The  nobles  held  aloof,  while  some  aged  clergymen  tried  to 
conduct  a  war.  He  hardly  dared  to  think  what  would  happen  if  a  few 
French  ships  touched  the  shore.  Since  then,  there  had  been  some  im- 
provement. No  invader  had  landed,  and  Guise's  capture  of  Thionville 
had  been  balanced  by  Egmont's  victory  at  Gravelines.  Shortly  before 
Mary's  death  negotiations  for  a  peace  were  begun  at  Cercamp ;  the 
outline  of  the  scheme  was  a  restoration  of  conquests.  But  Calais  stopped 
the  way.  The  French  could  not  surrender  that  prize,  and  they  were  the 
more  constant  in  their  determination  because  the  King  of  Spain  would  not 
much  longer  be  King  of  England,  and  an  isolated  England  would  have 
no  conquest  to  restore.  When  Elizabeth  became  Queen,  Calais  was  not 
yet  lost ;  that  was  the  worst  of  it.  Both  Kings  were  weary  of  the  war  ; 
behind  both  yawned  gulfs  of  debt  and  heresy.  But  the  ruler  of  the 
Netherlands  was  deeply  concerned  in  the  recovery  of  Calais  —  perhaps 
more  materially,  though  less  sentimentally,  than  were  the  English.  Feria 
has  reported  the  profound  remark  that  when  Calais  was  captured  many 
Englishmen  ceased  to  go  to  church.  A  Protestant  Elizabeth  might  have 
to  sign  away  the  last  memorial  of  old  glories ;  and  that  would  not  fill 
the  churches.  Philip,  it  might  be  plain,  would  not  suffer  the  French  to 
invade  England  through  Scotland ;  but  the  tie  between  Spain  and  an 
heretical  England  would  be  the  coolest  selfishness,  the  King's  mind  would 
be  distracted  between  his  faith  and  his  policy,  and  if  he  were  compelled 
to  save  England  from  the  French,  he  certainly  would  not  save  England 
for  the  English. 

True  that  for  Protestant  eyes  there  was  light  on  the  horizon.  Any- 
one could  see  that  there  would  be  religious  troubles  in  France  and 
Scotland.  Geneva  was  active,  and  Rome  seemed  to  be  doting.  That 
summer  the  psalms  had  gone  up  loudl}'-  from  the  Pre-aux-Clercs,  and  a 
Chatillon  had  been  arrested.  That  autumn  St  Giles  of  Edinburgh  had 
lain  prostrate  in  the  mud.  Expectant  heirs  and  royal  cadets,  Bourbons 
and  Hamiltons,  were  wavering;  Maximilian  was  listening  to  an  en- 
lightened pastor;  P'rance,  Scotland,  the  Empire,  might  some  day  fall 
to  evangelical  lords.  Good  news  came  from  Poland,  Bohemia,  and 
Hungary ;  it  was  CA^en  rumoured  that  the  Pope  would  at  last  succeed 
in  shaking  Philip's  faith.  Still,  the  black  fact  of  the  moment  was  that 
Philip  and  Henry  were  making  peace  in  order  that  they  might  crush 
their  respective  heretics.  And  England's  military  weakness  was  patent 
to  all.  Her  soldiers  and  captains  were  disgracefully  old-fashioned,  and 
what  gunpowder  she  had  was  imported  from  the  Netherlands.  "  To 
make  a  lewd  comparison,"  said  an  Englishman,  "  England  is  as  a  bone 
thrown  between  two  dogs."  Was  this  bone  to  display  an  irritating 
activity  of  its  own,  merely  because  the  two  dogs  seemed  for  the  moment 
to  be  equal  and  opposite?  To  more  than  one  mind  came  the  same 
thought :  "  They  will  make  a  Piedmont  of  England." 


562  Religious  condition  of  England  [l558 

Within  the  country  the  prospect  was  dubious.  The  people  were 
discontented :  defeat  and  shame,  pestilence  and  famine,  had  lately  been 
their  lot.  A  new  experiment  would  be  welcome  ;  but  it  would  miserably 
fail  were  it  not  speedily  successful.  No  doubt,  the  fires  in  Smithfield  had 
harmed  the  Catholic  cause  by  confirming  the  faith  and  exasperating  the 
passions  of  the  Protestants.  No  doubt,  the  Spanish  marriage  was  detested. 
But  we  may  overestimate  the  dislike  of  persecution  and  the  dislike  of 
Spain.  No  considerable  body  of  Englishmen  would  deny  that  obstinate 
heretics  should  be  burnt.  There  was  no  need  for  Elizabeth  to  marry 
Philip  or  bring  Spaniards  into  the  land ;  but  the  Spanish  alliance,  the 
old  Anglo-Burgundian  alliance,  was  highly  valued  :  it  meant  safety  and 
trade  and  occasional  victories  over  the  hereditary  foe.  Moreover,  the 
English  Reformers  were  without  a  chief ;  beyond  Elizabeth  they  had  no 
pretender  to  the  throne ;  they  had  no  apostle,  no  prophet ;  they  were 
scattered  over  Europe  and  had  been  quarrelling,  Knoxians  against 
Coxians,  in  their  foreign  abodes.  Edward's  reign  had  worn  the  gloss  off 
the  new  theology.  We  may  indeed  be  sure  that,  had  Elizabeth  adhered 
to  the  old  faith,  she  must  have  quelled  plots  and  rebellions  or  herself 
been  quelled.  We  look  at  Scotland,  France,  and  the  Netherlands,  and, 
it  may  be,  infer  that  the  storm  would  have  overwhelmed  her.  Perhaps 
we  forget  how  largely  the  tempests  that  we  see  elsewhere  were  due  to 
the  momentous  choice  that  she  made  for  England.  It  must  probably 
be  allowed  that  most  of  the  young  men  of  brains  and  energy  who  grew 
to  manhood  under  Mary  were  lapsing  from  Catholicism,  and  that  the 
educated  women  were  falling  faster  and  further.  London  too,  Bonner's 
London,  was  Protestant,  and  London  might  be  worth  an  abolished  Mass. 
But  when,  after  some  years  of  fortunate  and  dexterous  government,  we 
see  how  strong  is  the  old  creed,  how  dangerous  is  Mary  Stewart  as  its 
champion,  we  cannot  feel  sure  that  Elizabeth  chose  the  path  which  was, 
or  which  seemed  to  be,  the  safest. 

Of  her  own  opinions  she  told  strange  tales.  Puzzled  by  her  shifty 
discourse,  a  Spanish  envoy  once  suggested  atheism.  When  a  legal  set- 
tlement had  been  made,  it  was  her  pleasure,  and  perhaps  her  duty,  to 
explain  that  her  religion  was  that  of  all  sensible  people.  The  difference 
between  the  various  versions  of  Christianity  "-ft'estoit  que  bagatelle.'''' 
So  she  agreed  with  the  Pope,  except  about  some  details ;  she  cherished 
the  Augsburg  confession,  or  something  very  like  it ;  she  was  at  one,  or 
nearly  at  one,  with  the  Huguenots.  She  may  have  promised  her  sister 
(but  this  is  not  proved)  to  make  no  change  in  religion;  at  any  rate  she 
had  gone  to  mass  without  much  ado.  Nevertheless  it  is  not  unlikely  that 
at  the  critical  time  her  conduct  was  swayed  rather  by  her  religious  beliefs 
or  disbeliefs  than  by  any  close  calculation  of  loss  and  gain.  She  had  not 
her  father's  taste  for  theology ;  she  was  neither  prig  like  her  brother  nor 
zealot  like  her  sister ;  but  she  had  been  taught  from  the  first  to  contemn 
the  Pope,  and  during  Edward's  reign  she  had  been  highly  educated  in 


1558]  Elizabeth's  reUfjion  563 

the  newest  doctrines.  John  Hooper,  the  father  of  the  Puritans,  had  ad- 
mired her  displays  of  argumentative  divinity.  More  than  one  Catholic 
who  spoke  with  her  in  later  days  was  struck  by  lier  ignorance  of  Catholic 
verity.  The  Bishop  of  Aquila  traced  her  phrases  to  "  the  lieretic  Italian 
friars."  He  seems  to  have  been  thinking  of  Vermigli  and  Ochino,  and 
there  may  have  been  some  little  truth  in  his  guess.  Once  slie  said  that 
she  liked  Italian  ways  and  manners  better  than  any  other,  and  sometimes 
seemed  to  herself  half  Italian.  Her  eyes  filled  with  tears  over  Peter 
Martyr's  congratulations.  She  had  talked  predestination  with  Fra 
Bernardino  and  had  translated  one  of  his  sermons ;  the  Puritans  were 
persuaded  that  if  she  would  listen  to  no  one  else,  she  would  listen  to 
him.  All  this  might  have  meant  little ;  but  then  she  had  suffered  in 
the  good  cause.  She  had  been  bullied  into  going  to  mass  ;  she  had  been 
imprisoned  ;  she  had  nearly  been  excluded  from  the  throne  ;  some  ardent 
Catholics  had  sought  her  life ;  and  her  suspected  heresies  liad  been  at 
least  a  part  of  her  offending.  It  would  have  been  base  to  disappoint 
all  those  who  had  prayed  for  her  and  plotted  for  her,  and  pleasant  it 
was  when  from  many  lands  came  letters  which  hailed  her  as  the  miracu- 
lously preserved  champion  of  the  truth.  She  had  a  text  ready  for  the 
bearer  of  the  good  news :  "  This  is  the  Lord's  doing  and  it  is  marvellous 
in  our  eyes." 

One  point  was  clear.  The  Henrican  Anglo-Catholicism  was  dead 
and  buried.  It  died  with  Henry  and  was  interred  by  Stephen  Gardiner, 
In  distant  days  its  spirit  might  arise  from  the  tomb  ;  but  not  yet.  The 
Count  of  Feria  and  Bishop  Tunstall  were  at  needless  pains  to  explain  to 
the  young  Queen  that  she  was  favouring  "  Lutherans  and  Zwinglians," 
whom  her  father  would  have  burnt.  But  in  1558  nothing  was  to  be 
gained  by  mere  schism.  Her  fellow  sovereigns,  more  especially  her 
brother-in-law,  could  have  taught  her  that  a  prince  might  enjoy  all  the 
advantages  of  spotless  orthodoxy  and  yet  keep  the  Pope  at  arm's  length. 
Many  Englishmen  hated  "  popery  "  ;  but  by  this  time  the  core  of  the 
popery  that  they  hated  was  no  longer  the  Papacy,  but  the  idolatrous 
Mass.  The  choice  lay  between  Catholicism  with  its  Poj^e  and  the 
creed  for  which  Cranmer  and  Ridley  died.  It  could  scarcely  be  lioped 
that  the  Bishops  would  yield  an  inch.  Very  shame,  if  no  worthier 
motive,  would  keep  them  true  to  the  newly  restored  supremacy  of  Rome. 
Happily  for  Elizabeth,  they  were  few  and  feeble.  Reginald  Pole  had 
hardly  outlived  Mary,  and  for  one  reason  or  another  had  made  no  haste 
in  filling  vacant  sees  ;  —  Feria  thought  that  the  "accursed  Cardinal"  had 
French  designs.  And  death  had  been  and  still  was  busy.  Only  sixteen 
instead  of  twenty-six  Bishops  were  entitled  to  attend  the  critical  Parlia- 
ment, and  only  eleven  with  the  Abbot  of  Westminster  were  present. 
Their  constancy  in  the  day  of  trial  makes  them  respectable  ;  but  not  one 
of  them  was  a  leader  of  men.  The  ablest  of  them  had  been  Henry's 
ministers  and  therefore  could  be  taunted  as  renegades. 


564  Elizabeth  and  Paul  IV  [i558 

A  story  which  came  from  a  good  quarter  bade  us  see  Elizabeth 
announcing  to  the  Pope  her  accession  to  the  throne,  and  not  rejecting 
Catholicism  until  Paul  IV  declared  that  England  was  a  papal  fief  and 
she  an  usurping  bastard.  Now,  Caraffa  was  capable  of  any  imprudence 
and  just  at  this  moment  seemed  bent  on  reviving  the  claims  of 
medieval  Pontiffs,  in  order  that  he  might  drive  a  long-suffering  Em- 
peror into  the  arms  of  the  Lutherans.  But  it  is  certain  now  that  in 
the  matter  of  courtesy  Elizabeth,  not  Paul,  was  the  offender.  She 
ignored  his  existence.  Edward  Carne  was  living  at  Rome  as  Mary's 
ambassador.  He  received  no  letters  of  credence  from  the  new  Queen, 
and  on  the  1st  of  February,  1559,  she  told  him  to  come  home  as  she 
had  nothing  for  him  to  do.  Meanwhile  the  French  were  thinking  to 
obtain  a  Bull  against  her ;  they  hoped  that  at  all  events  Paul  would  not 
allow  her  to  marry  her  dead  sister's  husband.  At  Christmastide  (1558), 
when  she  was  making  a  scene  in  her  chapel  over  the  elevation  of  the 
Host,  the  Pope  was  talking  kindly  of  her  to  the  French  ambassador, 
would  not  promise  to  refuse  a  dispensation,  but  could  not  believe  that 
another  Englishwoman  would  want  to  marry  a  detestable  Spaniard. 
A  little  later  he  knew  more  about  her  and  detained  Carne  (a  not  unwill- 
ing prisoner)  at  Rome  (March  27),  not  because  she  was  base-born,  but 
because  she  had  revolted  from  the  Holy  See.  He  had  just  taken  occasion 
to  declare  in  a  Bull  that  princes  guilty  of  heresy  are  deprived  of  all 
lawful  power  by  the  mere  fact  of  their  guilt  (February  15).  This  edict, 
though  it  may  have  been  mainly  aimed  at  Ferdinand's  three  Protestant 
Electors,  was  a  salutary  warning  for  Elizabeth  and  Anthony  and  Maxi- 
milian ;  but  no  names  were  named.  Philip  had  influence  enough  to  balk 
the  French  intrigue  and  protect  his  sister-in-law  from  a  direct  anathema. 
The  Spaniard  may  in  Paul's  eyes  have  been  somewhat  worse  than  a 
heretic  ;  but  the  quarrel  with  the  other  Habsburg,  and  then  the  sudden 
attack  upon  his  own  scandalous  nephews,  were  enough  to  consume  the 
few  remaining  days  of  the  fierce  old  man.  He  has  much  to  answer  for  ; 
but  it  was  no  insult  from  him  that  made  Elizabeth  a  Protestant. 

No  time  was  lost.  Mary's  death  (November  17,  1558)  dissolved  a 
Parliament,  Heath,  Archbishop  of  York  and  Chancellor  of  the  realm, 
dismissed  it,  and  with  loyal  words  proclaimed  the  new  Queen.  Within 
three  weeks  (December  5)  writs  went  out  for  a  new  Parliament. 
Elizabeth  was  going  to  exact  conformity  to  a  statutory  religion.  For 
the  moment  the  statutory  religion  was  the  Roman  Catholic,  and  she 
would  have  taken  a  false  step  if  in  the  name  of  some  higher  law  she  had 
annulled  or  ignored  the  Marian  statutes.  At  once  she  forbade  innova- 
tions and  thus  disappointed  the  French,  who  hoped  for  a  turbulent 
revolution.  A  new  and  happy  et  caetera  was  introduced  into  the  royal 
style  and  seemed  to  hint,  without  naming,  a  Headship  of  the  Church. 
Every  change  pointed  one  way.  Some  of  the  old  Councillors  were 
retained,  but  the  new  Councillors  were  Protestants.     William  Cecil,  then 


1558-9]  First  measures  of  EUzaheth  565 

aged  thirty-eight,  had  been  Somerset's  and  was  to  be  Elizabeth's  secre- 
tary. Like  her  he  had  gone  to  mass,  but  no  Catholic  doubted  that  he 
was  a  sad  heretic.  The  Great  Seal,  resigned  by  Heath,  was  given  to 
Nicholas  Bacon.  He  and  Cecil  had  married  sisters  who  were  godly 
ladies  of  the  new  sort.  The  imprisoned  heretics  were  bailed,  and  the 
refugees  flocked  back  from  Frankfort,  Zurich  and  Geneva.  Hardly  was 
Mary  dead,  before  one  Bishop  was  arrested  for  an  inopportune  sermon 
(November  27).  Another  preached  at  her  funeral  (December  13)  and 
praised  her  for  rejecting  that  title  which  Elizabeth  had  not  yet  assumed  ; 
he  too  was  put  under  restraint.  Mary's  chief  mourner  was  not  her  sister, 
but  appropriately  enough,  the  Lady  Lennox  who  was  to  have  supplanted 
Elizabeth.  No  Bishop  preached  the  funeral  sermon  for  Charles  V,  and 
what  good  could  be  said  of  that  Catholic  Caesar  was  said  by  the 
Protestant  Dr  Bill  (December  24).  The  new  Queen  was  artist  to  the 
finger-tips.  The  English  Bible  was  rapturously  kissed  ;  the  Tower 
could  not  be  re-entered  without  uplifted  eyes  and  thankful  words  ;  her 
hand  (it  was  a  pretty  hand)  shrank,  so  folk  said,  from  Bonner's  lips. 
Christmas  day  was  chosen  for  a  more  decisive  scene.  The  Bishop  who 
was  to  say  mass  in  her  presence  was  told  not  to  elevate  the  Host.  He 
would  not  obey ;  so  after  the  Gospel  out  went  Elizabeth ;  she  could  no 
longer  witness  that  idolatry.  Three  weeks  later  (January  15)  she  was 
crowned  while  Calvin  was  dedicating  to  her  his  comments  on  Isaiah. 
What  happened  at  the  coronation  is  obscure.  The  Bishops,  it  seems, 
swore  fealty  in  the  accustomed  manner ;  the  Epistle  and  Gospel  were 
read  in  English  ;  it  is  said  that  the  celebrant  was  one  of  the  Queen's  chap- 
lains and  that  he  did  not  elevate  the  Host  ;  it  is  said  that  she  did  not 
communicate  ;  she  was  anointed  by  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  whose  rank 
would  not  have  entitled  him  to  this  office,  had  not  others  refused  it. 
At  length  the  day  came  for  a  Parliament  (January  25).  A  mass  was 
said  at  Westminster  early  in  the  morning.  At  a  later  hour  the  Queen 
approached  the  Abbey  with  her  choir  singing  in  English.  The  last 
of  the  Abbots  came  to  meet  her  with  monks  and  candles.  "Away 
with  those  torches,"  she  exclaimed  ;  "  we  can  see  well  enough  ! "  And 
then  Edward's  tutor,  Dr  Cox,  late  of  Frankfort,  preached  ;  and  he 
preached,  it  is  said,  for  an  hour  and  a  half,  the  peers  all  standing. 

The  negotiations  between  Spain,  England  and  France  had  been 
brought  to  a  pause  by  Mary's  death,  but  were  to  be  resumed  after  a 
brief  interval,  during  which  Elizabeth  was  to  make  up  her  mind.  Some 
outwardly  amicable  letters  passed  between  her  and  Henry  IL  She  tried 
to  play  the  part  of  the  pure-bred  Englishwoman,  who  should  not  suffer 
for  the  sins  of  the  Spanish  Mary .  But  the  French  were  not  to  be  coaxed 
out  of  Calais,  and  she  knew  that  they  were  seeking  a  papal  Bull  against 
her.  It  became  plain  that  she  must  not  detach  herself  from  Spain  and 
that,  even  with  Philip's  help,  Calais  could  only  be  obtained  after  another 
war,  for  which  England  was  shamefully  unready.    Then,  in  the  middle 


566  First  Parlkwient  of  Elizabeth  [i559 

of  Januar}^  came  through  Feria  the  expected  offer  of  Philip's  hand. 
Elizabeth  seemed  to  hesitate,  had  doubts  about  the  Pope's  dispensing 
power  and  so  forth  ;  but  in  the  end  said  that  she  did  not  mean  to  marry, 
and  added  that  she  was  a  heretic.  Philip,  it  seems,  was  relieved  by  the 
refusal ;  he  had  laboriously  explained  to  his  ambassador  that  his  propo- 
sal was  a  sacrifice  laid  upon  the  altar  of  the  Catholic  faith.  He  had 
hopes,  which  were  encouraged  in  England,  that  one  of  his  Austrian 
cousins,  Ferdinand  or  Charles,  would  succeed  where  he  had  failed,  se- 
cure England  for  orthodoxy,  and  protect  the  Netherlands  from  the  ill 
example  that  an  heretical  England  would  set. 

Meanwhile  the  great  Treaty  of  Cateau-Cambresis  was  in  the  making. 
Elizabeth  tried  to  retain  Philip's  self-interested  support ;  and  she  retained 
it.  Without  substantial  aid  from  England,  he  would  not  fight  for 
Calais  ;  she  would  have  to  sign  it  away  ;  but  so  earnest  had  he  been  in 
this  matter  that  the  French  covenanted  to  restore  the  treasured  town 
after  eight  years  and  further  to  pay  half-a-million  of  crowns  by  way  of 
penalty  in  case  they  broke  their  promise.  No  one  supposed  that  they 
would  keep  it  ;  still  they  had  consented  to  make  the  retention  of  Calais 
a  just  cause  for  war,  and  Elizabeth  could  plausibly  say  that  some 
remnants  of  honour  had  been  saved.  But  the  clouds  collected  once 
more.  New  differences  broke  out  among  the  negotiators,  who  had 
half  a  world  to  regulate,  and,  before  the  intricate  settlement  could  be 
completed,  a  marriage  had  been  arranged  between  Philip  and  one  of 
Henry's  daughters.  Elizabeth  of  France,  not  Elizabeth  of  England, 
was  to  be  the  bride.     The  conjunction  was  ominous  for  heretics. 

From  the  first  days  of  February  to  the  first  days  of  April  the 
negotiations  had  been  pending.  Meanwhile  in  England  little  had  been 
accomplished.  It  had  become  plain  that  the  clergy  in  possession  (but 
there  was  another  and  expectant  clergy  out  of  possession)  would  not 
yield.  The  Convocation  of  Canterbury  met  when  Parliament  met,  and 
the  Lower  House  declared  for  transubstantiation,  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Mass,  and  the  Roman  supremacy  ;  also  it  idly  protested  that  laymen 
were  not  to  meddle  with  faith,  worship,  or  discipline  (February  17, 1559). 
The  Bishops  were  staunch  ;  the  English  Church  by  its  constitutional 
organs  refused  to  reform  itself  ;  the  Reformation  would  be  an  unprece- 
dented state-stroke.  Probably  the  assembled  Commons  were  willing  to 
strike.  The  influence  of  the  Crown  had  been  used  on  the  Protestant 
side  ;  but  Cecil  had  hardly  gathered  the  reins  in  his  hand,  and  the 
government's  control  over  the  electoral  machinery  must  have  been  un- 
usually weak.  Our  statistics  are  imperfect,  but  the  number  of  knights 
and  burgesses  who,  having  served  in  1558,  were  again  returned  in  1559 
was  not  abnormally  small,  and  with  the  House  of  1558  Mary  had  been 
well  content.  Also  we  may  see  at  Westminster  not  a  few  men  who 
soon  afterwards  are  "  hinderers  of  true  religion  "  or  at  best  only  "  faint 
professors  "  ;  but  probably  the  nation  at  large  was  not  unwilling  that 


1559 


The  Act  of  Supremacy  567 


Elizabeth  should  make  her  experiment.  A  few  creations  and  restora- 
tions of  peerages  strengthened  the  Protestant  element  among  the  lords. 
The  Earl  of  Bedford  and  Lord  Clinton  appeared  as  proxies  for  many 
absent  peers,  and,  of  all  the  lords,  Bedford  (Francis  Russell)  was  the 
most  decisively  committed  to  radical  reft)rm.  The  Howards  were  for 
the  Queen,  their  cousin  ;  the  young  Duke  of  Norfolk,  England's  one 
duke,  was  at  this  time  ardently  Protestant,  and  in  the  next  year  was 
shocked  at  the  sight  of  undestroyed  altars. 

Money  was  cheerfully  voted.  The  Queen  was  asked  to  choose  a 
husband,  and  professed  her  wish  to  die  a  maid.  She  may  have  meant 
what  she  said,  but  assuredly  did  not  mean  that  it  should  be  believed.  A 
prudently  j^hrased  statute  announced  that  she  was  "  lawfully  descended 
and  come  of  the  blood  royal"  ;  another  declared  her  capable  of  inheriting 
from  her  divorced  and  attainted  mother  ;  the  painful  past  was  veiled  in 
general  words.  There  was  little  difficulty  about  a  resumption  of  those 
tenths  and  first-fruits  which  Mary  had  abandoned.  Round  the  question 
of  ecclesiastical  supremacy  the  battle  raged,  and  it  raged  for  two  months 
and  more  (February  9  to  April  29).  Seemingly  the  Queen's  ministers 
carried  through  the  Lower  House  a  bill  which  went  the  full  Henrican 
length  in  its  Caesaro-papalism  and  its  severity.  Upon  pain  of  a  traitor's 
death,  everyone  was  to  swear  that  Elizabeth  was  the  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  of  England.  In  the  Upper  House,  to  which  the  bill  came  on 
the  27th  of  February,  the  Bishops  had  to  oppose  a  measure  wliich  would 
leave  the  lives  of  all  open  Romanists  at  the  mercy  of  the  government. 
Few  though  they  were,  the  dozen  prelates  could  still  do  much  in  a  House 
where  there  were  rarely  more  than  thirty  temporal  lords,  and  probably 
Cecil  had  asked  for  more  than  he  wanted.  On  the  18th  of  March  the 
project  had  taken  a  far  milder  form  ;  forfeiture  of  office  and  benefice  was 
to  be  the  punishment  of  those  who  would  not  swear.  Against  this  more 
lenient  measure  only  two  temporal  lords  protested ;  but  a  Catholic  says 
that  other  "  good  Christians "  were  feigning  to  be  ill.  The  bill  went 
back  to  the  Commons  ;  then  back  with  amendments  to  the  Lords,  who 
read  it  thrice  on  the  22nd.  Easter  fell  on  the  2Gth,  and  it  had  been 
hoped  that  by  that  time  Parliament  would  have  finished  its  work.  Very 
little  had  been  done  ;  doctrine  and  worship  had  hardly  been  touched. 
Apparently  an  attempt  to  change  the  services  of  the  Church  had  been 
made,  had  met  with  resistance,  and  had  been  abandoned. 

Elizabeth  was  in  advance  of  the  law  and  beckoned  the  nation 
forward.  During  that  Lent  the  Court  sermon  had  been  the  only 
sermon,  the  preacher  Scory  or  Sandys,  Grindal  or  Cox.  A  papist's 
excited  fancy  saw  a  congregation  of  five  thousand  and  heard  extravagant 
blasphemy.  On  Easter  day  the  Queen  received  the  Communion  in  both 
kinds  ;  the  news  ran  over  Europe ;  Antoine  de  Bourbon  on  the  same 
day  had  done  the  like  at  Pau  ;  Mary  of  Lorraine  had  marked  that  fes- 
tival for  the  return  of  all  Scots  to  the  Catholic  worship.    The  colloquy 


568  The  colloquy  of  Westminster  [1559 

of  Westminster  follows.  There  was  to  be  a  trial  by  battle  in  the  Abbey 
between  chosen  champions  of  the  two  faiths.  Its  outcome  might  make 
us  suspect  that  a  trap  was  laid  by  the  Protestants.  But  it  is  by  no  means 
certain  that  the  challenge  came  from  their  side,  and  the  Spanish  ambas- 
sador took  some  credit  for  arranging  the  combat.  The  colloquy  of 
Westminster  stands  midway  between  that  of  Worms  (1557)  and  that  of 
Poissy  (1561).  The  Catholics  were  wont  to  get  the  better  in  these  feats 
of  arms,  because,  so  soon  as  Christ's  presence  in  the  Eucharist  was  men- 
tioned, the  Protestants  fell  a-fighting  among  themselves.  Apparently  on 
this  occasion  the  rules  of  the  debate  were  settled  by  Heath  and  Bacon. 
The  Great  Seal  had  passed  from  an  amiable  to  an  abler  keeper.  The  men 
of  the  Old  Learning  were  to  defend  the  use  of  Latin  in  the  services  of 
the  Church,  to  deny  that  a  "  particular  Church  "  can  change  rites  and 
ceremonies  and  to  maintain  the  propitiatory  sacrifice  of  the  Mass.  Their 
first  two  theses  would  bring  them  into  conflict  with  national  feeling  ; 
and  at  the  third  point  they  would  be  exposed  to  the  united  force  of 
Lutherans  and  Helvetians,  for  the  sacrifice,  and  not  the  presence,  was 
to  be  debated.  It  was  a  less  advantage  for  the  Reformers  that  their 
adversaries  were  to  speak  first,  for  there  was  to  be  no  extemporary 
argument  but  only  a  reading  of  written  dissertations.  In  the  choir  of 
the  Abbey,  before  Council,  Lords,  Commons  and  multitude,  the  com- 
batants took  their  places  on  Friday,  the  31st  of  March.  At  once  the 
Catholics  began  to  except  against  the  rules  that  they  were  required  to 
observe.  Dr  Cole,  however,  maintained  their  first  proposition  and 
Dr  Home  read  the  Protestant  essay.  The  Reformers  were  well  content 
with  that  day's  work  and  the  applause  that  followed.  On  Monday  the 
second  question  was  to  be  handled.  Of  what  happened  we  have  no 
impartial  account  ;  we  do  not  know  what  had  passed  between  Heath 
and  Bacon,  or  whether  the  Catholic  doctors  were  taken  by  surprise. 
Howbeit,  they  chose  the  worst  course ;  they  wrangled  about  procedure 
and  refused  to  continue  the  debate.  Apparently  they  were  out  of  heart 
and  leaderless.  Two  of  the  Bishops  were  forthwith  imprisoned  by  the 
Council  for  intemperate  words,  and  thus  the  Catholic  party  in  the 
House  of  Lords  was  seriously  weakened  at  a  critical  moment.  Moreover, 
the  inference  that  men  do  not  break  off  a  debate  with  preliminary 
objections  when  they  are  confident  of  success  in  the  main  issue, 
though  it  is  not  always  just,  is  always  natural. 

The  next  day  Parliament  resumed  its  work.  Meanwhile,  Elizabeth 
had  at  length  decided  that  she  would  not  assume  tlie  Henrican  title, 
though  assuredly  she  had  meant  that  it  should  be,  as  it  had  been, 
offered  to  her.  Women  should  keep  silence  in  the  churches  ;  so  there 
was  difficulty  about  a  "dumb  head."  She  had  managed  to  get  a 
little  credit  from  Philip's  envoy  and  a  little  from  zealous  Calvinists  by 
saying  that  she  would  not  be  Head  of  the  Church,  and  she  could  then 
tell  appropriate  persons  that  she  scorned  a  style  which  the  Pope  had 


1559]  The  Act  of  Uniformity  o69 

polluted.  So  Cecil  had  to  go  to  the  Commons  and  explain  that  there 
must  be  a  new  bill  and  new  oath.  He  met  with  some  opposition,  for 
there  were  who  held  that  the  Queen  was  Supreme  Head  hire  divino. 
Ultimately  a  phrase  was  fashioned  which  declared  that  she  was  the  only 
Supreme  Governor  of  the  realm  as  well  in  all  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical 
things  or  causes  as  in  temporal,  and  that  no  foreign  prince  or  prelate 
had  any  ecclesiastical  or  spiritual  authority  within  her  dominions.  How- 
ever, among  other  statutes  of  Henry  VI H,  one  was  revived  which  pro- 
claims that  the  King  is  Head  of  the  Church,  and  that  by  the  word  of 
God  all  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  flows  from  him.  Catholics  suspected 
that  Elizabeth's  husband  would  be  head  of  the  Church,  if  not  head  of 
his  wife,  and  saw  the  old  title  concealed  behind  the  new  et  caetera. 
Protestant  lawyers  said  that  she  could  take  the  title  whenever  she 
pleased.  Sensible  men  saw  that,  having  the  substance,  she  could  afford 
to  waive  the  irritating  name.  On  the  14th  of  April  the  bill  was  before 
the  Lords.  There  were  renewed  debates  and  more  changes ;  and  the 
famous  Act  of  Supremacy  was  not  finally  secured  until  the  29th. 

In  the  last  days  of  an  unusually  long  session  a  bill  for  the  Uni- 
formity of  Religion  went  rapidly  through  both  Houses  (April  18-28). 
The  services  prescribed  in  a  certain  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  none 
other,  were  to  be  lawful.  The  embryonic  history  of  this  measure  is  ob- 
scure. An  informal  committee  of  Protestant  divines  seems  to  have  been 
appointed  by  the  Queen  to  prepare  a  book.  It  has  been  thought  that 
as  the  basis  of  their  labours  they  took  the  Second  Book  of  Edward  VI, 
but  desired  a  further  simplification  of  ceremonies.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  are  some  signs  that  Cecil  and  the  Queen  thought  that  the  Second 
Book,  which  had  hardly  been  introduced  before  it  was  abrogated,  had 
already  gone  far  enough  or  too  far  in  the  abolition  of  accustomed  rites. 
All  this,  however,  is  very  uncertain.  Our  guess  may  be  that,  when  men 
were  weary  of  the  prolonged  debate  over  the  Supremacy  and  its  continu- 
ance was  becoming  a  national  danger  (for  violent  speeches  had  been 
made),  the  Queen's  advisers  took  the  short  course  of  proposing  the  Book 
of  1552  with  very  few  changes.  At  such  a  moment  relief  might  be 
found  in  what  could  be  called  a  mere  act  of  restoration,  and  the 
Edwardian  Book,  however  unfamiliar,  was  already  ennobled  by  the  blood 
of  martyrs.  There  are  signs  of  haste,  or  of  divided  counsels,  for  the 
new  Book  when  it  came  from  the  press  differed  in  some  little,  but  not 
trivial,  matters  from  that  which  Parliament  had  expressly  sanctioned. 
The  changes  sanctioned  by  Parliament  were  few.  An  offensive  phrase 
about  the  Bishop  of  Rome's  "detestable  enormities"  was  expunged, 
apparently  by  the  House  of  Lords.  An  addition  from  older  sources  was 
made  to  the  words  that  accompany  the  delivery  of  bread  and  wine 
to  the  communicant,  whereby  a  charge  of  the  purest  Zwinglianism 
might  be  obviated.  At  the  moment  it  was  of  importance  to  Elizabeth 
that  she  should  assure  the    German   Princes   that   her    religion   was 


570  The  religious  settlement  [l559 

Augustan  ;  for  they  feared,  and  not  without  cause,  that  it  was  Helvetian. 
A  certain  "black  rubric"  which  had  never  formed  part  of  the  statutory 
book  fell  away  ;  it  would  have  offended  Lutherans ;  we  have  reason  to 
believe  that  it  had  been  inserted  in  order  to  meet  the  scruples  of  John 
Knox.  Of  what  was  done  in  the  matter  of  ornaments  by  the  statute, 
by  the  rubrics  of  the  Book  and  by  "injunctions"  that  the  Queen 
promptly  issued,  it  would  be  impossible  to  speak  fairly  without  a 
lengthy  quotation  of  documents,  the  import  of  which  became  in  the 
nineteenth  century  a  theme  of  prolonged  and  inconclusive  disputation.  It 
must  here  suffice  that  there  are  few  signs  of  any  of  the  clergymen  who 
accepted  the  Prayer  Book  either  having  worn  or  having  desired  to  wear 
in  the  ordinary  churches  —  there  was  at  times  a  little  more  splendour  in 
cathedrals  —  any  ecclesiastical  robe  except  the  surplice.  But,  to  return 
to  Elizabeth's  Parliament,  we  have  it  on  fairly  good  authority  that  nine 
temporal  lords,  including  the  Treasurer  (the  Marquis  of  Winchester), 
and  nine  prelates  (two  Bishops  were  in  gaol)  voted  against  the  bill,  and 
that  it  was  only  carried  by  three  votes.  Unfortunately  at  an  exciting 
moment  there  is  a  gap,  perhaps  a  significant  gap,  in  the  official  record, 
and  we  cease  to  know  what  lords  were  present  in  the  House.  But  about 
thirty  temporal  peers  had  lately  been  in  attendance,  and  so  we  may  infer 
that  some  of  them  were  inclined  neither  to  alter  the  religion  of  England 
nor  yet  to  oppose  the  Queen.  On  the  5th  of  May,  the  Bishops  were 
fighting  in  vain  for  the  renovated  monasteries.  On  the  8th,  Parliament 
was  dissolved. 

At  a  moment  of  strain  and  peril  a  wonderfully  durable  settlement 
had  been  made.  There  is  cause  for  thinking  that  the  Queen's  advisers 
had  been  compelled  to  abandon  considerable  parts  of  a  lengthy  pro- 
gramme ;  but  the  great  lines  had  been  drawn  and  were  permanent. 
For  this  reason  they  can  hardly  be  described  in  words  that  are  both 
just  and  few  ;  but  perhaps  we  may  make  a  summary  of  those  points 
whicli  were  the  most  important  to  the  men  of  1559.  A  radical  change 
in  doctrine,  worship  and  discipline  has  been  made  by  Queen  and  Par- 
liament against  the  will  of  prelates  and  ecclesiastical  Councils.  The 
legislative  power  of  the  Convocations  is  once  more  subjected  to  royal 
control.  The  derivation  of  episcopal  from  royal  jurisdiction  has  been 
once  more  asserted  in  the  words  of  Henry  VIII.  Appeal  from  the  Courts 
of  the  Church  lies  to  royal  delegates  who  may  be  laymen.  What  might 
fairly  be  called  a  plenitude  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  of  the  corrective 
sort  can  be,  and  at  once  is,  committed  to  delegates  who  constitute  what 
is  soon  known  as  the  Court  of  High  Commission  and  strongly  resembles 
the  consistory  of  a  German  Prince.  Obstinate  heresy  is  still  a  capital 
crime ;  but  practically  the  Bishops  have  little  power  of  forcing  heretics 
to  stand  a  trial,  and,  unless  Parliament  and  Convocation  otherwise  ordain, 
only  the  wilder  sectaries  will  be  in  danger  of  burning.  There  is  no 
"  liberty  of  cult."    The  Prayer  Book  prescribes  the  only  lawful  form  of 


1559]  The  neiv  Bishops  571 

common  worship.  The  clergyman  who  adopts  any  other,  even  in  a  private 
chapel,  commits  a  crime  ;  so  does  he  who  procures  this  aberration  from 
conformity.  Everyone  must  go  to  church  on  Sunday  and  bide  prayer 
and  preaching  or  forfeit  twelve  pence  to  the  use  of  the  poor.  Much 
also  can  be  done  to  ensure  conformity  by  excommunication  which  has 
imprisonment  behind  it.  The  papal  authority  is  abolished.  Clergy  and 
ofhce-holders  can  be  required  to  swear  that  it  is  nauglit  ;  if  they  refuse 
the  oath,  they  lose  office  and  benefice.  If  anyone  advisedly  maintains 
that  authority,  he  forfeits  his  goods  ;  on  a  third  conviction  he  is  a 
traitor.  The  service  book  is  not  such  as  will  satisfy  all  ardent  Re- 
formers ;  but  their  foreign  fathers  in  the  faith  think  it  not  intolerable, 
and  the  glad  news  goes  out  that  the  Mass  is  abolished.  The  word 
"  Protestant,"  which  is  rapidly  spreading  from  Germany,  comes  as  a 
welcome  name.  In  the  view  of  an  officially  inspired  apologist  of  the 
Elizabethan  settlement,  those  who  are  not  Papists  are  Protestants. 

The  requisite  laws  had  been  made,  but  whether  they  would  take  ef- 
fect was  very  uncertain.  The  new  oath  was  not  tendered  to  the  judges  ; 
and  some  of  them  were  decided  Romanists.  Nor  was  the  validity  of 
the  statutes  unquestioned,  for  it  was  by  no  means  so  plain  as  it  now 
is  that  an  Act  against  which  the  spiritual  Lords  have  voted  in  a  body 
may  still  be  an  Act  of  the  three  Estates.  Gradually  in  the  summer  and 
autumn  the  Bishops  were  called  upon  to  swear  ;  they  refused  and  were 
deprived.  It  is  not  certain  that  the  one  weak  brother,  Kitchin  of  Llandaff, 
actually  swore  the  oath,  though  he  promised  to  exact  it  from  others. 
Futile  hopes  seem  to  have  been  entertained  that  Tunstall  and  Heath 
would  at  least  take  part  in  the  consecration  of  their  Protestant  suc- 
cessors. Such  successors  were  nominated  by  the  Queen  ;  but  to  make 
Bishops  of  them  was  not  easy.  Apparently  a  government  bill  dealing 
with  this  matter  had  come  to  naught.  Probably  the  Queen's  advisers 
had  intended  to  abolish  the  canonical  election  ;  they  procured  its  abo- 
lition in  Ireland  on  the  ground  that  it  was  inconsistent  with  the  Royal 
Supremacy  ;  but  for  some  cause  or  another  the  English  Parliament  had 
restored  that  grotesque  Henrican  device,  the  compulsory  election  of 
a  royal  nominee.  By  a  personal  interview  Elizabeth  secured  the  con- 
version of  the  dean  of  the  two  metropolitan  churches,  that  pliant  old 
diplomat  Nicholas  Wotton.  When  sees  and  benefices  were  rapidly 
falling  vacant,  his  adhesion  was  of  great  importance  if  all  was  to  be 
done  in  an  orderly  way. 

But  given  the  election,  there  must  still  be  confirmation  and  consecra- 
tion ;  statute  required  it.  The  cooperation  of  four  "  Bishops  "  would  be 
necessary  if  Matthew  Parker  was  to  sit  where  Reginald  Pole  liad  sat. 
Four  men  in  episcopal  Orders  might  be  found  :  for  instance,  William 
Barlow,  of  whose  Protestant  religion  there  could  be  no  doubt,  since 
Albert  of  Prussia  had  lately  attested  it ;  but  these  men  would  not  be 
in  possession  of  English  sees.    Moreover,  it  seems  to  have  been  doubted 


572  The  Scottish  rebellion  [i559 

whetherthe  Edwardian  Ordinal  had  been  revived  as  part  of  the  Edwardian 
Prayer  Book.  Cecil  was  puzzled,  but  equal  to  the  occasion.  In  a  docu- 
ment redolent  of  the  papal  chancery  Elizabeth  "  supplied  "  all  "  defects," 
and  at  length  on  the  17th  of  December,  in  the  chapel  at  Lambeth, 
Parker  was  consecrated  with  Edwardian  rites  by  Barlow,  Scory,  Coverdale 
and  Hodgkin.  The  story  of  a  simpler  ceremony  at  the  Nag's  Head 
tavern  was  not  concocted  until  long  afterwards  ;  it  should  have  for 
pendants  a  Protestant  fable  which  told  of  a  dramatic  scene  between 
Elizabeth  and  the  Catholic  prelates,  and  an  Anglican  fable  which  strove 
to  suggest  that  the  Prayer  Book  was  sanctioned  by  a  synod  of  Bishops 
and  clergy.  A  large  number  of  deans  and  canons  followed  the  example 
set  by  the  Bishops.  Of  their  inferiors  hardly  more  than  two  hundred,  so 
it  seems,  were  deprived  for  refusing  the  oath.  The  royal  commissioners 
treated  the  hesitating  priests  with  patient  forbearance  ;  and  the  meaning 
of  the  oath  was  minimised  by  an  ably  worded  Proclamation.  We  may 
conjecture  that  many  of  those  who  swore  expected  another  turn  of 
the  always  turning  wheel.  However,  Elizabeth  succeeded  in  finding 
creditable  occupants  for  the  vacant  dignities  ;  of  Parker  and  some  of  his 
suffragans  more  than  this  might  be  said.  The  new  service  was  intro- 
duced without  exciting  disturbances  ;  the  altars  and  roods  were  pulled 
down,  tables  were  purchased,  and  a  coat  of  whitewash  veiled  the  pictured 
saints  from  view.  Among  the  laity  there  was  much  despondent  in- 
difference. Within  a  dozen  years  there  had  been  four  great  changes 
in  worship,  and  no  good  had  come  of  it  all.  For  some  time  afterwards 
there  are  many  country  gentlemen  whom  the  Bishops  describe  as 
"indifferent  in  religion."  Would  the  Queen's  Church  secure  them  and 
their  children  ?  That  question  could  not  be  answered  by  one  who 
looked  only  at  England.  From  the  first,  Elizabeth  and  Cecil,  who 
were  entering  into  their  long  partnership,  had  looked  abroad. 

The  month  of  May,  1559,  which  saw  the  ratification  of  the  Treaty  of 
Cateau-Cambresis,  is  a  grand  month  in  the  annals  of  the  heresy  which 
was  to  be  destroyed.  A  hideous  act  of  faith  at  Valladolid  may  show 
us  that  Catholicism  is  safe  in  Spain  ;  but  the  English  Parliament  ends 
its  work,  a  French  Reformed  Church  shapes  itself  in  the  synod  of  Paris, 
and  Scotland  bursts  into  flame.  In  1558  we  saw  it  glowing.  Mary  of 
Guise  was  temporising  ;  she  had  not  yet  obtained  the  crown  matrimonial 
for  the  Dauphin.  In  the  winter  Parliament  she  had  her  way  ;  the  crown 
was  to  be  (but  never  was)  carried  to  her  son-in-law.  His  father  had 
just  ceased  his  intrigues  with  English  Protestants,  and  was  making  peace 
in  order  that  he  might  be  busy  among  the  Protestants  of  France.  The 
Regent  of  Scotland  was  given  to  understand  that  the  time  for  tolerance 
was  past.  In  March,  1559,  the  Scottish  prelates  followed  the  example  of 
their  English  brethren  and  uttered  their  Non  possumus.  They  proposed 
to  remedy  many  an  indefensible  abuse,  but  to  new  beliefs  there  could 


1559]  Elizabeth  and  the  Scottish  Protestants  573 

be  no  concession.  The  Queen-mother  fixed  Easter  day  for  the  return  of 
all  men  to  the  Catholic  worship.  The  order  was  disregarded.  On  the 
10th  of  May  the  more  notorious  of  the  preachers  were  to  answer  at 
Stirling  for  their  misdeeds.  They  collected  at  Perth,  with  Protestant 
lords  around  them.  At  this  moment  Elizabeth's  best  friend  sprang 
into  the  arena.  John  Knox  had  been  fuming  at  Dieppe.  Elizabeth, 
enraged  at  his  ill-timed  '•'■  blast,"  denied  him  a  safe  conduct.  Frangois 
Morel,  too,  the  French  Reformer,  implored  Calvin  to  keep  this  fire-brand 
out  of  England  lest  all  should  be  spoilt.  But  if  Knox  chose  to  revisit  his 
native  laud  that  was  no  affair  of  Elizabeth's,  and  he  was  predestinated 
to  win  for  Calvinism  the  most  durable  of  its  triumphs.  He  landed  in 
Scotland  on  the  2nd  of  May  and  was  at  Perth  by  the  11th.  Then 
there  was  a  sermon  ;  a  stone  was  thrown  ;  an  image  was  broken,  and  the 
churches  of  St  Johnston  were  wrecked.  Before  the  end  of  the  month 
there  were  two  armed  hosts  in  the  field.  There  were  more  sermons,  and 
whereKnoxpreachedtheidols  fell  and  monks  andnunswere  turned  adrift. 
There  were  futile  negotiations  and  disregarded  truces.  At  the  head  of 
the  belligerent  Congregation  rode  Glencairn,  Argyll,  and  Lord  James. 
Chatelherault  was  still  with  the  Regent  ;  and  she  had  a  small  force  of 
disciplined  Frenchmen.  At  the  end  of  July  a  temporary  truce  was  made 
at  Leith.  The  Congregation  could  bring  a  numerous  host  (of  the 
medieval  sort)  into  the  field,  but  could  not  keep  it  there.  However,  as 
the  power  of  the  French  soldiers  was  displayed,  the  revolutionary 
movement  became  more  and  more  national.  The  strife,  if  it  was  between 
Catholic  andCalvinist,  was  also  a  strife  for  the  delivery  of  Scotland  from  a 
foreign  army.  None  the  less  there  was  a  revolt.  Thenceforth,  Calvinism 
often  appears  as  a  rebellious  religion.  This,  however,  is  its  first  appear- 
ance in  that  character.  Calvin  had  long  been  a  power  in  the  world  of 
Reformed  theology,  and  his  death  (1564)  was  not  far  distant ;  but  in 
1559  the  Count  of  Feria  was  at  pains  to  tell  King  Philip  that  "  this 
Calvin  is  a  Frenchman  and  a  great  heretic  "  (Marcli  19).  Knox,  when 
he  preached  "  the  rascal  multitude  "  into  iconoclastic  fury,  was  setting  an 
example  to  Gueux  and  Huguenots.  What  would  Elizabeth  think  of  it  ? 
Throughout  the  winter  and  spring  Englishmen  and  Scots,  who  had 
been  dragged  into  war  by  their  foreign  masters,  had  been  meeting  on 
the  border  and  talking  first  of  armistice  and  then  of  peace.  Already  in 
January  Maitland  of  Lethington  had  a  strong  desire  to  speak  with  Sir 
William  Cecil  and  since  then  had  been  twice  in  London.  He  was  the 
Regent's  Secretary,  conforming  in  religion  as  Cecil  had  conformed;  but 
it  is  likely  that  the  core  of  such  creed  as  he  had  was  unionism.  The  news 
that  came  from  Scotland  in  May  can  hardly  have  surprised  tlie  English 
Secretary.  "  Some  great  consequences  must  needs  follow  "  ;  this  was  his 
quiet  comment  (May  26).  Diplomatic  relations  with  France  liad  just 
been  resumed.  Nicholas  Throckmorton,  one  of  those  able  men  who  begin 
to  collect  around  Elizabeth,  had  gone  to  reside  there  as  her  ambassador, 


574  England,  France,  and  Scotland  [l559 

had  gone  to  "  practise  "  there  and  exacerbate  the  "  garboils  "  there.  One 
of  the  first  bits  of  news  that  he  sends  home  is  that  Arran  has  been 
summoned  to  Court  from  Poitou,  where  he  has  been  Calvinising,  has 
disobeyed  the  summons  and  cannot  be  found  (May  30).  The  Guises 
connect  Arran's  disappearance  with  Throckmorton's  advent  ;  and  who 
shall  say  that  they  are  wrong  ?  In  June  Cecil  heard  from  the  border 
that  the  Scottish  lords  were  devising  how  this  young  man  could  be 
brought  home  and  married  "  you  know  where."  "  You  have  a  Queen," 
said  a  Scot  to  Throckmorton,  "  and  we  our  Prince  the  Earl  of  Arran, 
marriable  both,  and  the  chief  upholders  of  God's  religion."  Arran  might 
soon  be  King  of  Scotland.  The  Dauphiness,  who  at  the  French  Court 
was  being  called  Queen  of  England,  did  not  look  as  if  she  were  long  for 
this  world :  Throckmorton  noted  her  swoons.  Arran  had  escaped  to 
Geneva.  Early  in  July  Elizabeth  was  busy,  and  so  was  Calvin,  over  the 
transmission  of  this  invaluable  youth  to  the  quarter  where  he  could  best 
serve  God  and  the  English  Queen.  Petitions  for  aid  had  come  from 
Scotland.  Cecil  foresaw  what  would  happen  :  the  Protestants  were  to 
be  helped  "  first  with  promises,  next  with  money,  and  last  with  arms  " 
(July  8).  But  to  go  beyond  the  first  stage  was  hazardous.  The  late 
King  of  England  was  onl}^  a  few  miles  off  with  his  fleet  and  veteran 
troops  ;  he  was  being  married  by  proxy  to  a  French  Princess  ;  he  had 
thoughts  of  enticing  Catharine  Grey  out  of  England,  in  order  that  he 
might  have  another  candidate  for  the  throne,  if  it  were  necessary  to 
depose  the  disobedient  Elizabeth,  And  could  Elizabeth  openly  support 
these  rebels  ?  In  the  answer  to  that  question  lay  the  rare  importance 
of  Arran.  The  Scottish  uproar  must  become  a  constitutional  movement 
directed  by  a  prince  of  the  blood  royal  against  a  French  attempt  to 
deprive  a  nation  of  its  independence.  Cecil  explained  to  Calvin  that  if 
true  religion  is  to  be  supported  it  must  first  convert  great  noblemen 
(June  22). 

Then  the  danger  from  France  seemed  to  increase.  There  was  a 
mischance  at  a  tournament  and  Henry  II  was  dead  (July  10).  The  next 
news  was  that  "  the  House  of  Guise  ruleth  "  (July  13).  In  truth,  this  was 
good  news,  Elizabeth's  adversary  was  no  longer  an  united  France.  The 
Lorrainers  were  not  France  ;  their  enemies  told  them  that  they  were  not 
French.  But  the  Duke  and  Cardinal  were  ruling  France  ;  they  came  to 
power  as  the  uncles  of  the  young  King's  wife,  and  soon  there  might  be 
a  boy  born  who  would  be  Valois-Tudor-Stewart-Guise.  A  Guise  was  rul- 
ing Scotland  also,  and  the  rebellion  against  her  was  hanging  fire.  So 
early  in  August  Cecil's  second  stage  was  reached,  and  Ralph  Sadler  was 
carrying  three  thousand  pounds  to  the  border.  He  knew  his  Scotland  ; 
Henry  VIII  had  sent  him  there  on  a  fool's  errand  ;  there  would  be  better 
management  this  time.  In  the  same  month  Philip  turned  his  back  on 
tlie  Netherlands,  never  to  see  them  more.  Thencefortli,  he  would  be  the 
secluded  King  of  a  distant  country.     Also,  Paul  IV  died,  and  for  four 


1559]  English  help  for  Scotland  575 

montlis  the  Roman  Church  had  no  supreme  governor.  The  Supreme 
Governor  of  the  English  Church  could  breathe  more  freely.  She  kept 
her  St  Bartholomew  (August  24).  There  was  burning  in  Bartlemy  Fair, 
burning  in  Smithiield  —  but  only  of  wooden  roods  and  Maries  and  Johns 
and  such-like  popish  gear.  "It  is  done  of  purpose  to  confirm  the 
Scottish  revolt"  :  such  was  a  guess  made  at  Brussels  (September  2)  ;  and 
it  may  have  been  right,  for  there  was  little  of  the  natural  iconoclast  in 
Elizabeth.  A  few  days  later  (August  29)  Arran  was  safely  and  secretly 
in  her  presence,  and  thence  was  smuggled  into  Scotland.  Probably  she 
took  his  measure  ;  he  was  not  quite  sane,  but  would  be  useful.  Soon 
afterwards  Philip's  ambassador  knew  that  she  was  fomenting  tumults 
in  Scotland  through  "a  heretic  preacher  called  Knox."  That  was 
unkindly  said,  but  not  substantially  untrue.  Early  in  October  "  the 
Congregation"  began  once  more  to  take  an  armed  shape.  Cliatelherault, 
that  unstable  "second  person,"  had  been  brought  over  by  his  impetuous 
son.  The  French  troops  in  Scotland  had  been  reinforced  ;  the  struggle 
was  between  Scot  and  Frenchman.  So,  to  the  horror  of  Bishops-elect 
(whose  consecration  had  not  yet  been  managed),  the  table  in  Elizabeth's 
chapel  began  to  look  like  an  altar  with  cross  and  candles.  "  She  will 
not  favour  the  Scots  in  their  religion,"  said  Gilles  de  Noailles,  the  French 
ambassador.  "  She  is  afraid,"  said  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine.  "  She  is 
going  to  marry  the  Archduke  Charles,  who  is  coming  here  in  disguise," 
said  many  people.  Surely  she  wished  that  just  those  comments  should 
be  made  ;  and  so  Dr  Cox,  by  this  time  elect  of  Ely,  had  to  stomach 
cross  and  candles  as  best  he  might. 

The  host  of  the  Congregation  arrived  at  Edinburgh  ;  a  manifesto 
declared  that  the  Regent  was  deposed  (October  21).  She  and  the 
French  were  fortifying  Leith  ;  the  castle  was  held  by  the  neutral  Lord 
Erskine.  But  once  more  the  extemporised  army  began  to  melt  away. 
Treasure  sent  by  Elizabeth  was  captured  by  a  border  ruihan,  James 
Hepburn,  Earl  of  Bothwell,  who  was  to  play  a  part  in  coming  tragedies. 
The  insurgents  fled  from  Edinburgh  (November  6).  In  negotiation 
with  Cecil,  Knox  was  showing  the  worldly  wisdom  that  underlay  his 
Hebraic  frenzies  ;  he  knew  the  weak  side  of  his  fellow-countrymen  ; 
without  more  aid  from  England,  the  movement  would  fail.  Knox, 
however,  was  not  presentable  at  Court ;  Lethington  was.  The  Regent's 
Secretary  had  left  her  and  had  carried  to  the  opposite  camp  tlie  state- 
craft that  it  sorely  needed.  He  saw  a  bright  prospect  for  his  native 
land  and  took  the  road  to  London.  Cecil's  third  stage  was  at  hand. 
There  were  long  debates  in  the  English  Council ;  there  were  "Philipians" 
in  it,  and  all  that  passed  there  was  soon  known  at  the  French  embassy. 
The  Queen  was  irresolute  ;  even  Bacon  was  for  delay  ;  but,  though  some 
French  ships  had  been  wrecked,  others  were  ready,  and  the  danger  to 
Scotland,  and  through  Scotland  to  England,  was  very  grave.  At  length 
Cecil  and  Lethington  won  their  cause.     An  army  under  the  Duke  of 


576  Treaty  of  Berwick  [1559-60 

Norfolk  was  to  be  raised  and  placed  on  the  border.  Large  supplies  of 
arms  had  been  imported  from  the  dominions  of  the  Catholic  King.  Bar- 
gains for  professed  soldiers  were  struck  with  German  princes.  William 
Winter,  Master  of  the  Ordnance,  was  to  take  fourteen  ships  to  the  Forth. 
He  might  "as  of  his  own  hand"  pick  a  quarrel  with  the  French  ;  but 
there  was  to  be  no  avowed  war  (December  16).  On  the  morrow 
Dr  Parker  was  consecrated.  He  had  been  properly  shocked  by  Knox's 
doings.  "  God  keep  us  from  such  visitation  as  Knox  hath  attempted  in 
Scotland  :  the  people  to  be  orderers  of  things  !  "  (November  6).  If  in 
that  autumn  the  people  of  Scotland  had  not  ordered  things  in  a  summary 
way,  Dr  Parker's  tenure  of  the  archiepiscopate  might  have  been  pre- 
carious. A  few  days  later  and  there  was  once  more  a  Pope  (December 
25)  :  this  time  a  sane  Pope,  Pius  IV,  who  would  have  to  deplore  the 
loss,  not  only  of  England,  but  of  Scotland  also.  God  of  His  mercy,  said 
Lethington,  had  removed  that  difference  of  religion. 

Once  more  the  waves  were  kind  to  Elizabeth.  They  repulsed  the 
Marquis  of  Elbeuf  (Rene  of  Lorraine),  and  suffered  Winter  to  pass.  All 
the  news  that  came  from  France  was  good.  It  told  of  unwillingness  that 
national  treasure  should  be  spent  in  the  cause  of  the  Guises,  of  a  dearth 
of  recruits  for  Scotland,  of  heretics  burnt  and  heretics  rescued,  of 
factions  in  religion  fomented  by  the  great.  Something  was  very  wrong 
in  France,  for  envoys  came  thence  with  soft  words.  "  Strike  now,"  was 
Throckmorton's  counsel ;  "  they  only  seek  to  gain  time."  So  a  pact  was 
signed  at  Berwick  (February  27,  1560)  between  Norfolk  and  the  Scot- 
tish lords  who  acted  on  behalf  of  "  the  second  person  of  the  realm  of 
Scotland."  Elizabeth  took  Scotland,  its  liberties,  its  nobility,  its  ex- 
pectant heir  under  her  protection,  and  the  Frencli  were  to  be  expelled. 
On  second  thoughts  nothing  was  published  about  "  the  profession  of 
Christ's  true  religion."  Every  French  envoy  spoke  softer  than  the  last. 
Mary  Stewart  had  assumed  the  arms  of  England  because  she  was  proud  of 
being  Elizabeth's  cousin.  The  title  of  Queen  of  England  was  taken  to 
annoy,  not  Elizabeth,  but  Mary  Tudor.  All  this  meant  the  Tumult  of 
Amboise  (March  14-20).  Behind  that  strange  essay  in  rebellion, 
behind  la  Renaudie,  men  have  seen  Conde,  and  behind  Conde  two  dim 
figures,  Jean  Calvin  and  the  English  Queen.  Calvin's  acquittal  seems 
deserved.  The  profession  of  Christ's  true  religion  was  not  to  be  advanced 
by  so  ill  laid  a  plot.  But  a  very  ill  laid  plot  might  cripple  France  at 
this  critical  moment,  and,  before  we  absolve  Elizabeth,  we  wish  to  know 
why  a  certain  Tremaine  was  sent  to  Britanny,  where  the  plotters  were 
gathering,  and  whether  Chantonnay,  Granvelle's  brother,  was  right  in 
saying  that  la  Renaudie  had  been  at  the  English  Court.  Certain  it  is 
that  Throckmorton  had  intrigued  with  Anthony  of  Navarre,  with  the 
Vidame  of  Chartres,  with  every  enemy  of  the  Guises ;  he  was  an  apt 
pupil  in  the  school  that  Renard  and  Noailles  had  founded  in  England. 
A  little  later  (May  23)  messages  from  Conde  to  the  Queen  were  going 


1560]       TJie  siege  of  Leith  and  Treaty  of  Edinhurgh      577 

round  by  Strassburg  ;  and  in  June  Tremaine  brought  from  France  a 
scheme  which  would  put  Breton  or  Norman  towns  into  English  hands : 
a  sclieme  from  which  Cecil  as  yet  recoiled  as  from  "a  bottomless  pit." 

Be  all  this  as  it  may,  the  tumult  of  Amboise  fell  pat  into  Cecirs 
scheme,  and  on  the  29th  of  March  Lord  Grey  crossed  the  border  with 
English  troops.  The  Scottish  affair  then  takes  this  shape  :  — A  small  but 
disciplined  force  of  Frenchmen  in  the  fortified  town  of  Leith  ;  the  Regent 
in  Edinburgh  Castle,  which  is  held  by  the  neutral  Erskine  ;  English 
ships  in  the  Forth  ;  an  English  and  Scottish  army  before  Leith  ;  very  few 
Scots  openly  siding  with  the  Queen-mother  ;  the  French  seeking  to  gain 
time.  We  hasten  to  the  end.  An  assault  failed,  but  hunger  was  doing 
its  work.  The  Regent  died  on  the  11th  of  June  ;  even  stern  Protestants 
have  a  good  word  for  the  gallant  woman.  Cecil  went  into  Scotland  to 
negotiate  with  French  plenipotentiaries.  He  wrung  from  them  the 
Treaty  of  Edinburgh,  which  was  signed  on  the  6th  of  July.  The  French 
troops  were  to  quit  Scotland.  The  French  King  and  Queen  were  never 
thereafter  to  use  the  arms  and  style  of  England.  Compensation  for  the 
insult  to  her  title  was  to  be  awarded  to  Elizabeth  by  arbitrators  or  the 
King  of  Spain.  A  pact  concluded  between  Francis  and  Mary  on  the 
one  hand  and  their  Scottish  subjects  on  the  other  was  to  be  observed. 
That  pact  itself  was  humiliating.  There  was  to  be  pardon  for  the 
insurgents  ;  there  were  to  be  but  six  score  French  soldiers  in  the  land;  a 
Scottish  Council  was  to  be  appointed  :  — in  a  word,  Scotland  was  to  be  for 
the  Scots.  But  the  lowest  point  was  touched  when  the  observance  of 
this  pact  between  sovereign  and  rebels  was  made  a  term  in  the  treaty 
between  England  and  France,  Cecil  and  famine  were  inexorable.  We 
had  to  sign,  said  the  French  commissioners,  or  four  tliousand  brave 
men  would  have  perished  before  our  eyes  and  Scotland  would  have  been 
utterly  lost. 

And  so  the  French  troops  were  deported  from  Scotland  and  the 
English  army  came  home  from  a  splendid  exploit.  The  military  display, 
it  is  true,  had  not  been  creditable  ;  there  had  been  disunion,  if  no  worse, 
among  the  captains ;  there  had  been  peculation,  desertion,  sheer 
cowardice.  All  the  martial  glory  goes  to  the  brave  besieged.  But  for 
the  first  time  an  English  army  marched  out  of  Scotland  leaving  gratitude 
behind.  Perhaps  the  truest  victory  that  England  had  won  was  won 
over  herself.  Not  a  word  had  been  publicly  said  of  that  old  suzerainty  ; 
no  spoil  had  been  taken,  not  a  town  detained.  Knox  included  in  his 
liturgy  a  prayer  that  there  might  nevermore  be  war  between  Scotland 
and  England,  and  that  prayer  has  been  fulfilled.  There  have  been 
wars  between  British  factions,  but  never  another  truly  national  war 
between  the  two  nations.  Elizabeth  in  her  first  two  years  "  had  done 
what  none  of  her  ancestors  could  do,  for  by  the  occasion  of  her  religion 
she  had  obtained  the  amity  of  Scotland,  and  thus  had  God  blemished 
the  fame  of  the  great  men  of  the  world  through  the  doings  of  a  weak 

_ 37 


578  Elizaheth,  PJiilip  II  and  Pius  IV  [i560 

woman"  : — such  was  the  judgment  of  a  daughter  of  France  and  a 
mother  in  the  Protestant  Israel,  of  Renee,  the  venerable  Duchess  of 
Ferrara.  Another  observer,  Hubert  Languet,  said  that  the  English 
were  so  proud  of  the  conversion  of  Scotland  that  they  were  recovering 
their  old  insolence  and  would  be  the  very  people  to  defy  the  imminent 
Council  at  Trent.  The  tone  of  Catholic  correspondence  changes  :  the 
Elizabeth  who  was  merely  rushing  to  her  ruin,  will  now  set  all  Europe 
alight  in  her  downward  course.  That  young  woman's  conduct,  when  we 
now  examine  it,  will  not  seem  heroic.  As  was  often  to  happen  in 
coming  years,  she  had  been  pursuing  two  policies  at  once,  and  she  was 
ready  to  fall  back  upon  an  Austrian  marriage  if  the  Scottish  revolt 
miscarried.  But  this  was  not  what  men  saw  at  the  time.  What  was 
seen  was  that  she  and  Cecil  had  played  and  won  a  masterly  game  ;  and 
Englishmen  must  have  felt  that  the  change  of  religion  coincided  with  a 
transfer  of  power  from  incapable  to  capable  hands. 

All  this  had  been  done,  not  only  without  Spanish  help,  but  (so  a 
patriot  might  say)  in  defiance  of  Spain.  To  discover  Philip's  intentions 
had  been  difficult,  and  in  truth  he  had  been  of  two  minds.  Elizabeth 
was  setting  the  worst  of  examples.  Say  what  she  would,  she  was 
encouraging  a  Protestant  revolt  against  a  Catholic  King.  She  was  doing 
this  in  sight,  and  with  the  hardly  concealed  applause,  of  the  Nether- 
landers  ;  a  friar  who  dared  to  preach  against  her  at  Antwerp  went  in  fear 
of  his  life ;  whole  families  of  Flemings  were  already  taking  refuge  in 
England.  Philip's  new  French  wife  was  coming  home  to  him  ;  his 
mother-in-law,  Catharine  de'  Medici,  implored  him  to  stop  Elizabeth 
from  "  playing  the  fool."  He  had  in  some  kind  made  himself  responsible 
for  the  religious  affairs  of  England,  by  assuring  the  Pope  that  all  would 
yet  be  well.  But  the  intense  dread  of  France,  the  outcome  of  long  wars, 
could  not  be  eradicated,  and  was  reasonable  enough.  He  dared  not  let 
the  French  subdue  Scotland  and  threaten  England  on  both  sides.  More- 
over he  was  for  the  moment  miserably  poor  ;  Margaret  of  Parma,  his 
Regent  in  the  Netherlands,  had  hardly  a  crown  for  current  expenses,  and 
the  Estates  would  grant  nothing.  So  in  public  he  scolded  and  lectured 
Elizabeth,  while  in  private  he  hinted  that  what  she  was  doing  should  be 
done  quickly.  The  French,  too,  though  they  asked  his  aid,  hardly  wished 
him  to  fulfil  his  promise  of  sending  troops  to  Scotland.  Then  his 
navy  was  defeated  by  the  opportune  Turk  (May  11)  ;  and  the  Spaniards 
suspected  that  the  French,  if  guiltless  of,  were  not  displeased  at,  the 
disaster. 

This  was  not  all.  The  Pope  also  had  been  humiliated.  The  con- 
ciliatory Pius  IV  had  not  long  been  on  the  throne  before  he  sent  to 
Elizabeth  a  courteous  letter  (May  5,  1560).  Vincent  Parpaglia,  the 
Abbot  of  San  Solutore  at  Turin,  once  the  secretary  of  Cardinal  Pole,  was  to 
carry  it  to  her  as  Nuncio.  She  was  to  lend  him  her  ear,  and  a  strong 
hint  was  given  to  her  that  she  could  be  legitimated.     When  she  heard 


1560]  The  Scottish  Reformation  Parlianieut  579 

that  the  Nuncio  was  coming,  she  was  perhaps  a  little  frightened  ;  the 
choice  between  recantation  and  the  anathema  seemed  to  lie  before 
her  ;  so  she  talked  catholically  with  the  Spanish  ambassador.  But 
Philip,  when  he  heard  the  news,  was  seriously  offended.  He  saw  a 
French  intrigue,  and  the  diplomatic  machinery  of  the  Spanish  monarchy 
was  set  in  motion  to  procure  the  recall  of  the  Nuncio.  All  manner  of 
reasons  could  be  given  to  the  Pope  to  induce  a  cancellation  of  his  rash 
act.  Pius  was  convinced  or  overawed.  Margaret  of  Parma  stopped 
Parpaglia  at  Brussels.  How  to  extricate  the  Pope  from  the  adventure 
without  loss  of  dignity  was  then  the  difficult  question.  Happily  it  could 
be  said  that  Pole's  secretary  was  personally  distasteful  to  Philip,  who 
had  once  imprisoned  Parpaglia  as  a  French  spy.  So  at  Brussels  he 
enjoyed  himself  for  some  months,  then  announced  to  Elizabeth  that  after 
all  he  was  not  coming  to  her,  and  in  the  friendliest  way  sent  her  some 
Italian  gossip  (September  8).  He  said  that  he  should  go  back  by 
Germany,  and,  when  he  turned  aside  to  France,  Margaret  of  Parma 
knew  what  to  think  :  namely,  that  there  had  been  a  French  plot  to 
precipitate  a  collision  betw^een  Pius  and  Elizabeth.  At  the  French 
Court  the  disappointed  Nuncio  "  made  a  very  lewd  discourse  of  the  Queen, 
her  religion  and  proceedings."  As  to  Elizabeth,  she  had  answered  this 
first  papal  approach  by  throwing  the  Catholic  Bishops  into  prison.  And 
then,  it  is  to  be  feared  that  she,  or  someone  on  her  behalf,  told  how  the 
Pope  had  offered  to  confirm  her  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  if  only  she 
would  fall  down  and  worship  him. 

In  August,  1560,  a  Parliament  met  at  Edinburgh,  to  do  for  Scotland 
what  the  English  Parliament  had  done  in  1559.  The  Pope's  authority 
was  rejected,  and  the  Mass  was  abolished.  Upon  a  third  conviction  the 
sayer  or  hearer  of  mass  was  to  be  put  to  death.  A  Confession  of  Faith 
had  been  rapidly  compiled  by  Knox  and  his  fellow  preachers  ;  it  is  said 
that  Lethington  toned  down  asperities.  "To  see  it  pass  in  such  sort  as 
it  did  "  surprised  Elizabeth's  envoy  Randolph.  The  Scot  was  not  yet  a 
born  theologian.  Lethington  hinted  that  further  amendments  could  be 
made  if  Elizabeth  desired  them  (September  13),  and  she  made  bold  to  tell 
the  Lutheran  princes  that  Scotland  had  received  "the  same  religion  that 
is  used  in  Almaine  "  (December  30).  The  Reforming  preachers  were  few, 
but  the  few  earnest  Catholics  were  cowed.  "This  people  of  a  later  calling," 
as  an  English  preacher  called  the  Scots,  had  not  known  the  disappoint- 
ment of  a  young  Josiah's  reign,  and  heard  the  word  with  gladness. 
There  were  wide  differences,  however,  between  the  proceedings  of  the 
two  Parliaments.  The  English  problem  was  comparatively  simple.  Long 
before  1559  the  English  Church  had  been  relieved  of  superfluous  riches; 
there  was  only  a  modest  after-math  for  the  Elizabethan  scythe.  In 
Scotland  the  kirk-lands  were  broad,  and  were  held  by  prelates  or  quasi- 
prelates  who  were  turning  Protestant  or  were  closely  related  to  Lords  of 
the  Congregation.     Catholic  or  Calvinist,  the  possessor  meant  to  keep  a 


580  Success  of  the  Scottish  Reformation  [i560 

tight  grip  on  the  land.  The  Bishops  could  be  forbidden  to  say  mass  ; 
some  of  them  had  no  desire  to  be  troubled  with  that  or  any  other  duty  ; 
but  the  decent  Anglican  process,  which  substitutes  an  Edmund  Grindal 
for  an  Edmund  Bonner,  could  not  be  imitated.  The  Scottish  lords,  had 
they  wished  it,  could  not  have  thrust  an  ecclesiastical  suj)remacy  upon 
their  Catholic  Queen  ;  but  to  enrich  the  Crown  was  not  their  mind. 
The  new  preachers  naturally  desired  something  like  that  proprietary 
continuity  which  had  been  preserved  in  England  :  the  patrimony  of  the 
Church  should  sustain  the  new  religion.  They  soon  discovered  that  this 
was  "a  devout  imagination."  They  had  to  construct  an  ecclesiastical 
polity  on  new  lines,  and  they  set  to  work  upon  a  Book  of  Discipline. 
Elementary  questions  touching  the  relation  between  Church  and  State 
were  left  open.  Even  the  proceedings  of  the  August  Parliament  were  of 
doubtful  validity.  Contrary  to  wont,  a  hundred  or  more  of  the  "minor 
barons"  had  formed  a  part  of  the  assembly.  Also,  it  was  by  no  means 
clear  that  the  compact  signed  by  the  French  envoys  authorised  a 
Parliament  to  assemble  and  do  what  it  pleased  in  matters  of  religion. 

An  excuse  had  been  given  to  the  French  for  a  refusal  to  ratify  the 
treaty  with  England.  That  treaty  confirmed  a  convention  which  the 
Scots  were  already  breaking.  Another  part  of  the  great  project  was  not 
to  be  fullilled.  Elizabeth  was  not  going  to  marry  Arran,  though  the 
Estates  of  Scotland  begged  this  of  her  and  set  an  united  kingdom  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland  before  her  eyes.  Perhaps  it  was  well  that  Arran 
was  crazy  ;  otherwise  there  might  have  been  a  premature  enterprise.  A 
King  of  Scots  who  was  husband  of  the  English  Queen  would  have  been 
hateful  in  England  ;  Scotland  was  not  prepared  for  English  methods  of 
government ;  and  Elizabeth  had  troubles  enough  to  face  without  barbaric 
blood  feuds  and  a  Book  of  Discipline.  She  had  gained  a  great  advantage. 
Sudden  as  had  been  the  conversion  of  Scotland,  it  was  permanent. 
Beneath  all  that  was  fortuitous  and  all  that  was  despicable,  there  was  a 
moral  revolt.  "It  is  almost  miraculous,"  wrote  Randolph  in  the  June 
of  1560,  "to  see  how  the  word  of  God  takes  place  in  Scotland.  They 
are  better  willing  to  receive  discipline  than  in  any  country  I  ever  was  in. 
Upon  Sunday  before  noon  and  after  there  were  at  the  sermons  that 
confessed  their  offences  and  repented  their  lives  before  the  congregation. 
Cecil  and  Dr  Wotton  were  present.  .  .  .  They  think  to  see  next  Sunday 
Lady  Stonehouse,  by  whom  the  Archbishop  of  St  Andrews  has  had, 
without  sliame,  five  or  six  children,  openly  repent  herself."  Elizabeth, 
the  deliverer  of  Scotland,  had  built  an  external  buttress  for  her  English 
Church.  If  now  and  then  Knox  "  gave  her  cross  and  candles  a  wipe,"  he 
none  the  less  prayed  for  her  and  everlasting  friendship.  They  did  not 
love  each  other ;  but  she  had  saved  his  Scottish  Reformation,  and  he 
had  saved  her  Anglican  Settlement. 

Then,  at  the  end  of  this  full  year,  there  was  a  sudden  change  in 
France.  Francis  II  died  (December  5, 15G0)  ;  Mary  was  a  childless  widow; 


1561]  The  Queens  of  Enrjland  and  Scotland  581 

the  Guises  were  only  the  uncles  of  a  dowager.  A  mere  boy,  Charles  IX, 
was  King ;  power  had  passed  to  his  mother,  Catharine  de'  Medici  and 
the  Bourbons.  They  had  no  interest  in  ^Mary's  chiim  on  England,  and, 
to  say  the  least,  were  not  fanatical  Catholics.  After  some  hesitation 
Mary  resolved  to  return  to  Scotland.  She  had  hoped  for  the  hand  of 
Philip's  son,  Don  Carlos  ;  but  her  mother-in-law  had  foiled  her.  The 
kingdom  that  had  been  conveyed  to  the  Valois  was  not  to  be  transferred 
to  the  Habsburg,  and  a  niece  of  the  Guises  was  not  to  seat  herself  upon 
the  throne  of  Spain.  The  Scottish  nobles  were  not  averse  to  Mary's 
return,  as  Elizabeth  would  not  marry  Arran  and  there  was  thus  no  longer 
any  fear  that  Scotland  would  be  merged  in  France.  Mary  was  profuse  of 
kind  words ;  she  won  Lord  James  to  her  side,  and  even  Lethington  was 
given  to  understand  that  he  could  make  his  peace.  The  treaty  with 
England  she  would  not  confirm ;  she  would  wait  until  she  could  consult 
the  Scottish  Estates.  Elizabeth  regarded  this  as  a  dangerous  insult. 
Her  title  to  the  Crown  had  been  challenged,  and  the  challenge  was  not 
withdrawn.  Mary's  request  for  a  safe-conduct  througli  England  was 
rejected.  Orders  were  given  for  stopping  the  ship  that  bore  her  towards 
Scotland,  but  apparently  were  cancelled  at  the  last  minute.  She  landed 
at  Leith  on  the  19th  of  August,  1561.  The  long  duel  between  the  two 
Queens  began.  The  story  of  it  must  be  told  elsewhere ;  but  here  we 
may  notice  that  for  some  years  the  affairs  of  Scotland  were  favourable  to 
the  Elizabethan  religion.  Mary  issued  a  proclamation  (August  25, 
1561)  strikingly  similar  to  that  which  came  from  Elizabeth  on  the  first 
day  of  her  reign.  '*  The  state  of  religion  "  which  Mary  "  found  publicly 
and  universally  standing  at  her  home-coming  was  to  be  maintained 
until  altered  by  her  and  the  Estates  of  the  realm."  But  she  and  the 
Estates  were  not  at  one,  and  her  religious  position  was  tliat  of  a  barely 
tolerated  nonconformist.  Lord  James  and  Lethington  were  her  chief 
advisers,  and  hef  first  military  adventure  was  a  successful  contest  with 
turbulent  but  Catholic  Gordons.  Also  it  pleased  her  to  hold  out  hopes 
that  she  might  accept  Elizabeth's  religion,  if  her  claim  to  be  Elizabeth's 
heir  presumptive  were  conceded.  The  ratification  of  tlie  treaty  she  still 
refused,  asserting  (a  late  afterthought)  that  some  words  in  it  might 
deprive  her  of  her  right  to  succeed  P:iizabeth  if  Elizabeth  left  no  issue. 
She  desired  to  meet  Elizabeth  ;  Elizabeth  desired  to  meet  her  ;  and  the 
Scottish  Catholics  said  that  Mary  would  not  return  as  "  a  true  Christian 
woman  "  from  the  projected  interview.  Her  uncles  were  out  of  power. 
It  was  the  time  of  the  colloquy  of  Poissy  (September,  1561)  ;  it  was 
rumoured  that  Theodore  Beza  was  converting  the  Duke  of  Guise, 
who  talked  pleasantlv  with  Throckmorton  about  the  English  law  of 
inheritance.  The  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  publicly  flirted  with  Lutheranism . 
Elizabeth  learnt  that  her  cross  and  candles  marked  her  off  from  mere 
Calvinian  Huguenots,  though  she  kept  in  close  touch  with  Conde  and 
the  Admiral.     Moreover,  tlie  English  Catholics  were  slow  to  look  to 


582  Elizabeth  mid  Robert  Dudley  [i56i 

Scotland  for  a  deliverer ;  the  alien's  right  to  inherit  was  very  dubious ; 
they  looked  rather  to  young  Darnley,  who  was  born  in  England  and  by 
English  law  was  an  Englishman  and  the  son  of  an  English  mother.  So 
the  Elizabethan  religion  had  a  fair  chance  of  striking  root  before  the 
General  Council  could  do  its  work. 

The  invitation  to  the  General  Council  came,  and  was  flatly  refused 
{^May  5,  1561).  At  this  point  we  must  turn  for  one  moment  to  an 
obscure  and  romantic  episode.  From  the  first  days  of  her  reign  the 
English  Queen  had  shown  marked  favour  to  her  master  of  the  horse,  Lord 
Robert  Dudley — a  young  man,  handsome  and  accomplished,  ambitious 
and  unprincipled ;  the  son  of  that  Duke  of  Northumberland  who  set  Jane 
Grey  on  the  throne  and  died  as  a  traitor.  Dudley  was  a  married  man, 
but  lived  apart  from  his  wife.  Amy,  the  daughter  of  Sir  John  Robsart. 
Gossip  said  that  he  would  kill  her  and  marr}^  the  Queen.  On  the  8th  of 
September,  1560,  Avhen  he  was  with  the  Queen  at  Windsor,  his  wife's 
corpse  was  found  with  broken  neck  at  the  foot  of  a  staircase  in  Cumnor 
Hall.  Some  people  said  at  once  that  he  had  procured  her  death ;  and 
that  story  was  soon  being  told  in  all  the  Courts  of  Europe;  but  we  have 
no  proof  that  it  was  generally  believed  in  England  after  a  coroner's  jury 
had  given  a  verdict  which,  whatever  may  have  been  its  terms,  exculpated 
the  husband.  Dudley  (the  Leicester  of  after  times)  had  throughout  his 
life  many  bitter  enemies  ;  but  none  of  them,  so  far  as  we  know,  ever 
mentioned  any  evidence  of  his  guilt  that  a  modern  English  judge  would 
dream  of  leaving  to  a  jury.  We  should  see  merely  the  unscrupulous 
character  of  the  husband  and  the  violent,  opportune  and  not  easily  expli- 
cable death  of  the  wife,  were  it  not  for  a  letter  that  the  Spanish  ambas- 
sador wrote  to  Margaret  of  Parma.  That  letter  was  not  sent  until  its 
writer  knew  of  Amy's  death  (which  he  mentioned  in  a  postscript),  but 
it  professed  to  tell  of  what  had  passed  between  him,  the  Queen  and  Cecil 
at  some  earlier,  but  not  precisely  defined,  moment  of  time.  It  suggests 
(as  we  read  it)  that  Elizabeth  knew  that  Dudley  was  about  to  kill  his 
wife.  Cecil,  it  asserts,  desired  the  ambassador  to  intervene  and  reduce 
his  mistress  to  the  path  of  virtue.  Those  who  are  inclined  to  place 
faith  in  this  wonderful  tale  about  a  truly  wonderful  Cecil,  will  do  well 
to  remember  that  a  postscript  is  sometimes  composed  before  any  part 
of  the  letter  is  written,  and  that  Alvaro  de  la  Quadra,  Bishop  of  Aquila, 
was  suspected  by  the  acute  Throckmorton  of  taking  the  pay  of  the 
Guises.  At  that  moment  the  rulers  of  France  were  refusing  ratification 
of  the  Edinburgh  treaty,  and  were  much  concerned  that  Philip  should 
withdraw  his  support  from  Elizabeth.  The  practical  upshot  of  the 
letter  is  that  Elizabeth  has  plunged  into  an  abyss  of  infamy,  will 
probably  be  deposed  in  favour  of  the  Protestant  Earl  of  Huntingdon 
(Henry  Hastings),  and  will  be  imprisoned  with  her  favourite.  The 
sagacity  of  the  man  who  wrote  this  can  hardly  be  saved,  except  at  the 
expense  of  his  honesty.     Howbeit,  Elizabeth,  whether  she  loved  Dudley 


1560-1]  The  invitation  to  Trent  583 

or  no  (and  this  will  never  be  known)  behaved  as  if  she  had  thoughts  of 
marrying  him,  and  showed  little  regard  for  what  was  said  of  his  crime. 
One  reading  of  her  character,  and  perhaps  the  best,  makes  her  heartless 
and  nearly  sexless,  but  for  that  reason  indecorously  desirous  of  appearing 
to  the  world  as  both  the  subject  and  the  object  of  amorous  passions. 
Also  she  was  being  pestered  to  marry  the  Archduke  Charles,  who  would 
not  come  to  be  looked  at,  or  Arran  who  had  been  looked  at  and  rejected. 
Then  (January,  1561)  there  was  an  intrigue  between  the  Bishop  of 
Aquila  and  the  suspected  murderer.  Philip  was  to  favour  the  Queen's 
marriage  with  the  self-made  widower,  and  the  parties  to  this  unholy 
union  were  thenceforth  to  be  good  Catholics,  or  at  any  rate  were  to 
subject  themselves  and  the  realm  to  the  authority  of  the  General 
Council. 

There  was  superabundant  falsehood  on  all  sides.  Quadra,  Dudley, 
Cecil  and  Elizabeth,  were  all  of  them  experts  in  mendacity,  and  the 
exact  truth  we  are  not  likely  to  know  when  they  tell  the  story.  But 
the  outcome  of  it  all  was  that  a  papal  Nuncio,  the  Abbot  Martinengo, 
coming  this  time  with  Philip's  full  approval,  arrived  at  Brussels  with 
every  reason  to  believe  that  Elizabeth  would  favourably  listen  to  the 
invitation  that  he  was  bringing,  and  -then,  at  the  last  moment,  he  learnt 
that  he  might  not  cross  the  Channel.  There  are  signs  that  Cecil  had 
difficulty  in  bringing  about  this  result.  Something  stood  in  his  way. 
He  had  to  stimulate  the  English  Bishops  into  protest,  and  to  discover  a 
little  popish  plot  (there  was  always  one  to  be  discovered)  at  the  right 
moment.  It  is  conceivable  that  Dudley  and  Quadra  had  for  a  while 
ensnared  the  Queen  with  hopes  of  a  secure  reign  and  an  easy  life.  It 
is  quite  as  likely  that  she  was  employing  them  as  unconscious  agents  to 
keep  the  Catholics  quiet,  while  important  negotiations  were  pending  in 
France  and  Germany.  That  she  seriously  thought  of  sending  envoys  to 
the  Council  is  by  no  means  improbable  ;  and  some  stout  Protestants  held 
that  this  was  the  proper  course.  But  while  Quadra  and  Dudley  were 
concocting  their  plot,  she  kept  in  close  alliance  with  foreign  Protestants. 
Arrangements  for  a  reply  to  the  Pope  were  discussed  with  the  German 
Protestant  Princes  at  Naumburg  (January,  1561)  ;  and  strenuous  endea- 
vours were  made  through  the  puritanic  Earl  of  iiedford  to  dissuade  the 
French  from  participation  in  the  Tridentine  assembly.  The  end  of  it 
was  that  the  English  refusal  was  especially  emphatic,  and  given  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  be  a  rebuff  not  only  to  Rome  but  to  Spain. ^  An  irritating 
reference  to  a  recent  precedent  did  not  mend  matters  :  King  Phdip  and 
Queen  Mary  had  repulsed  a  Nuncio.  Another  reason  could  be  given. 
In  Ireland  the  Elizabethan  religion,  which  had  been  introduced  there  by 
Act  of  Parliament,  was  not  making  way.  In  August,  1560,  the  Pope, 
who  had  already  taken  upon  himself  to  dispose  of  two  Irish  bishoprics, 
sent  to  Ireland  David  Wolfe,  a  Jesuit  priest,  and  conferred  large  powers 
upon  him.     He  seems  to  have  slipped  over  secretly  from  Britanny,  where 


584:     England  and  the  First  French  War  of  Religion     [i562 

he  had  lain  hid.  Elizabeth  could  say,  and  probably  with  truth,  that  his 
proceedings  were  hostile  to  her  right  and  title.  As  to  a  Council,  of 
course  she  was  all  for  a  real  and  true,  a  "  free  and  general "  Council ;  all 
Protestants  were  ;  but  with  the  papistical  affair  at  Trent  she  would  have 
nothing  to  do.  Pins  had  thought  better  of  her  ;  her  lover's  crypto- 
Catholicism  had  been  talked  of  in  high  places. 

The  papal  Legate  at  the  French  Court,  the  Cardinal  of  Ferrara,  had 
some  hope  of  succeeding  where  others  had  failed  :  "  not  as  Legate  of 
Rome  or  the  Cardinal  of  Ferrara,  but  as  Hippolito  d'Este,"  an  Italian 
gentleman  devoted  to  Her  Grace's  service.  There  were  pleasant  letters; 
cross  and  candles  were  commended  ;  she  was  asked  to  retain  them 
"  even  as  it  were  for  the  Cardinal  of  Ferrara's  pleasure"  ;  but  hardly  had 
the  Council  been  re-opened  at  Trent  (January  18,  1562)  than  Elizabeth 
was  allying  herself  with  the  Huguenots  and  endeavouring  to  form  a 
Protestant  league  in  Germany.  The  dream  of  a  France  that  would 
peacefully  lapse  from  the  Roman  obedience  was  broken  at  Vassy  (March  1 , 
1562),  and  the  First  War  of  Religion  began.  In  April  Sechelles  came  to 
England  as  Conde's  envoy  and  was  accredited  by  Hotman  to  Cecil.  The 
danger  to  England  was  explained  by  the  Queen's  Secretary  : — The  crown 
of  France  would  be  in  the  hands  of  the  Guisians  ;  the  King  of  Spain 
would  help  them  ;  the  Queen  of  Scots  would  marry  Don  Carlos ;  the 
Council  would  condemn  the  Protestants  and  give  their  dominions  to  a 
Catholic  invader  (July  20).  On  the  other  hand,  Calais,  Dieppe,  or 
Havre,  "perhaps  all  three,"  might  be  Elizabeth's,  so  some  thought; 
indeed  "  all  Picardy,  Normandy,  and  Gascony  might  belong  to  England 
again."  The  Queen  had  been  thinking  of  such  possibilities  ;  already  in 
June,  1560,  an  offer  of  "  certain  towns  in  Britanny  and  Normandy  "  had 
been  made  to  her.  She  hesitated  long,  but  yielded,  and  on  the  20th  of 
September,  1562,  concluded  the  Treaty  of  Hampton  Court  with  the 
Prince  of  Conde.  She  was  to  help  with  money  and  men  and  hold  Havre, 
Dieppe,  and  Rouen  until  Calais  was  restored.  It  was  a  questionable 
step  ;  but  Philip  was  interfering  on  the  Catholic  side,  and  Calais  was 
covetable.  Of  course  she  was  not  at  war  with  Charles  IX  ;  far  from  it; 
she  was  bent  on  delivering  the  poor  lad  and  his  mother  from  his 
rebellious  subjects,  who  were  also  "her  inveterate  enemies,"  the  Guises. 
Of  religion  she  said  as  little  as  possible ;  but  the  Church  of  which  she 
was  the  Supreme  Governor  affirmed  in  prayer  that  the  Galilean  Catholics 
were  enemies  of  God's  Eternal  Word,  and  that  the  Calvinists  were  perse- 
cuted for  the  profession  of  God's  Holy  Name.  The  expedition  to  Havre 
failed  disastrously.  After  the  battle  of  Dreux  (December  19, 1562)  and 
theedictof  Amboise  (March  19, 1563),  all  parties  in  France  united  to  expel 
the  invader.  The  Earl  of  Warwick  (Ambrose  Dudley)  and  his  plague- 
stricken  army  were  compelled  to  evacuate  Havre  after  a  stubborn  resistance 
(July  28),  and  the  recovery  of  Calais  was  further  off  than  ever.  Elizabeth 
had  played  with  the  fire  once  too  often.     She  never  after  this  thought 


1563]  Elizabeth'' s  Second  Parliament  oS^ 


well  of  Huguenots ;  and  friendship  with  the  ruling  powers  of  France 
became  the  central  feature  of  her  resolutely  pacific  policy.  However, 
when  at  the  beginning  of  1563  she  met  her  Second  Parliament,  and  the 
Reformed  Church  of  England  held  its  first  Council,  all  was  going  well. 
Since  October  an  English  army  had  once  more  been  holding  a  French 
town ;  a  foolhardy  plot  devised  by  some  young  nephews  of  Cardinal 
Pole  had  been  opportunely  discovered,  and  the  French  and  Spanisli 
ambassadors  were  supposed  to  have  had  a  hand  in  it.  Some  notes  of 
Cecil's  suggest  effective  parliamentary  rhetoric : 

1559  The  religion  of  Christ  restored.  Foreign  authority  rejected  .  .  .  1560  The 
French  at  the  request  of  the  Scots,  partly  by  force,  partly  by  agreement,  sent  back 
to  France,  and  Scotland  set  free  from  the  servitude  of  the  pope.  1561  The 
debased  copper  and  brass  coinage  replaced  by  gold  and  silver.  England,  formerly 
unarmed,  supplied  more  abundantly  than  any  other  country  with  arms,  munitions 
and  artillery.    lo62    The  tottering  Church  of  Christ  in  France  succoured    .  .  . 

The  Queen,  it  is  true,  was  tormenting  her  faithful  subjects  by  play- 
ing fast  and  loose  with  all  her  many  wooers,  and  by  disallowing  all  talk 
of  what  would  happen  at  her  death.  It  was  a  policy  that  few  women 
could  have  maintained,  but  was  sagacious  and  successful.  It  made  men 
pray  that  her  days  might  be  long  ;  for,  when  compared  with  her  sister's, 
they  were  good  days,  and  when  they  were  over  there  would  be  civil 
war.  We  hear  the  preacher  :  —  "  How  was  this  our  realm  then  pestered 
with  strangers,  strange  gods,  strange  languages,  strange  religion,  strange 
coin  !  And  now  how  peaceably  rid  of  them  all  !  "  So  there  was  no 
difficulty  about  a  supply  of  money,  and  another  turn  might  be  given  to 
the  screw  of  conformity.  Some  new  classes  of  persons,  members  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  lawyers,  schoolmasters,  were  to  take  the  oath  of 
Supremacy ;  a  first  refusal  was  to  bring  imprisonment  and  forfeiture,  a 
second  death.  The  temporal  lords  procured  their  own  exemption  on 
the  ground  that  the  Queen  was  "  otherwise  sufficiently  assured  "  of  their 
loyalty.  That  might  be  so,  but  she  was  also  sufficientl}-  assured  of  a 
majority  in  the  Upper  House,  for  there  sat  in  it  four-and-twenty 
spiritual  Lords  of  her  own  nomination. 

The  Spanish  ambassador  reported  (January  14,  1563)  that  at  the 
opening  of  this  Parliament,  the  preacher,  Nowell,  Dean  of  St  Paul's, 
urged  the  Queen  "  to  kill  the  caged  wolves,"  thereby  being  meant  the 
Marian  Bishops.  Nowell's  sermon  is  extant,  and  says  too  mucli  about 
the  duty  of  slaying  the  ungodly.  Hitherto  the  Reformers,  the  men  to 
whom  Cranmer  and  Ridley  were  dear  friends  and  honoured  masters,  had 
shown  an  admirable  self-restraint.  A  few  savage  words  had  been  said, 
but  they  had  not  all  come  from  one  side.  Christopher  Goodman  desired 
that  "  the  bloody  Bishops  "  should  be  slain  ;  but  he  had  been  kept  out 
of  England  as  a  dangerous  fanatic.  Dr  John  Story,  in  open  Parliament, 
had  gloried  in  his  own  cruelty,  and  had  regretted  that  in  Mary's  day 
the  axe  had  not  been  laid  to  the  root  of  the  tree.     At  a  time  when 


586  Elizabeth  and  the  Catholics  [i563-6 

letters  from  the  Netherlands,  France  or  Spain  were  alwa3^s  telling  of 
burnt  Protestants,  nobody  was  burnt  in  England  and  very  few  people 
lay  in  prison  for  conscience'  sake.  The  deprived  Bishops  seem  to  have 
been  left  at  large  until  Parpaglia's  mission  ;  then  they  were  sent  to  gaol. 
Probably  they  could  be  lawfully  imprisoned  as  contumacious  excom- 
municates. Martineugo's  advent  induced  Cecil  to  clap  his  hand  on  a 
few  "mass-mongers,"  and  on  some  laymen  who  had  held  office  under 
Mary.  But  in  these  years  of  horror  it  is  a  small  matter  if  a  score  of 
Catholics  are  kept  in  that  Tower  where  Elizabeth  was  lately  confined ; 
and  her  preachers  had  some  right  to  speak  of  an  unexampled  clemency. 

Rightly  or  wrongly,  but  very  naturally,  there  was  one  man  especially 
odious  to  the  Protestants.  When  the  statute  of  1563  was  passed,  it  was 
said  among  the  Catholics  that  Bonner  would  soon  be  done  to  death,  and 
the  oath  that  he  had  already  refused  was  tendered  to  him  a  second  time 
by  Home  the  occupant  of  the  see  of  Winchester.  The  tender  was  only 
valid  if  Home  was  "Bishop  of  the  diocese."  Bonner,  who,  it  is  said, 
had  the  aid  of  Plowden,  the  most  famous  pleader  of  the  time,  threatened 
to  raise  the  fundamental  question  whether  Home  and  his  fellows  were 
lawful  Bishops.  He  was  prepared  to  dispute  the  validity  of  the  statutes 
of  1559  :  to  dispute  the  validity  of  the  quasi-papal  power  of  "  supplying 
defects  "  which  the  Queen  had  assumed  :  to  attack  the  very  heart  of  the 
new  order  of  things.  Elizabeth,  however,  was  not  to  be  hurried  into 
violence.  The  proceedings  against  him  were  stayed  ;  her  Bishops  were 
compelled  to  petition  the  Parliament  of  1566  for  a  declaration  that  they 
were  lawful  Bishops  ;  their  prayer  was  not  granted  except  with  the 
proviso  that  none  of  their  past  acts  touching  life  and  property  were  to 
be  thereby  validated  ;  and  eleven  out  of  some  thirty-five  temporal  Lords 
were  for  leaving  Dr  Parker  and  his  suffragans  in  their  uncomfortably 
dubious  position.  Elizabeth  allowed  Lords  and  Commons  to  discuss  and 
confirm  her  letters  patent  ;  she  was  allowing  all  to  see  that  no  Catholic 
who  refrained  from  plots  need  fear  anything  worse  than  twelve-penny 
fines  ;  but  she  had  not  yet  been  excommunicated  and  deposed. 

A  project  for  excommunication  and  deposition  was  sent  to  Trent 
from  Louvain,  where  the  Catholic  exiles  from  England  congregated. 
Like  Knox  and  Goodman  in  Mary's  reign,  those  who  had  fled  from 
persecution  were  already  setting  themselves  to  exasperate  the  persecutor. 
The  plan  that  found  favour  with  them  in  1563  involved  the  action  of 
the  Emperor's  son,  the  Archduke  Charles.  He  was  to  marry  Mary 
Stewart  (who,  however,  had  set  her  heart  on  a  grander  match),  and  then 
he  was  to  execute  the  papal  ban.  Englishmen,  it  was  said,  would 
never  again  accept  as  King  the  heir  to  the  throne  of  Spain  ;  but 
his  Austrian  kinsman  would  be  an  unexceptionable  candidate  or  con- 
queror. The  papal  Legates  at  Trent  consulted  the  Emperor,  who  told 
his  ambassadors  that  if  the  Council  wished  to  make  itself  ridiculous,  it 
had  better  depose  Elizabeth  ;  he  and  his  would  have  nothing  to  do  with 


1562-3]  Elizabeth  and  the  Council  of  Trent  587 

this  absurd  aud  dangerous  scheme  (June  19).  Soon  afterwards  he  was 
allowing  his  son's  marriage,  not  with  the  Catholic  ^lary,  but  with  the 
heretical  Elizabeth,  to  be  once  more  discussed,  and  the  negotiations  for 
this  union  were  being  conducted  by  the  eminently  Lutheran  Duke  of 
Wiirttemberg,  who  apparently  thought  that  pure  religion  would  be  the 
gainer  if  a  Habsburg,  Ferdinand's  son  and  Maximilian's  brother,  became 
King  of  a  Protestant  England.  Philip  too,  though  he  had  no  wish  to 
quarrel  with  his  uncle,  began  seriously  to  think  tliat,  in  the  interest  of 
the  Catholic  faith  and  the  Catholic  King,  Mary  Stewart  was  right  in 
preferring  the  Spanish  to  the  Austrian  Charles  ;  and  at  the  same  time 
he  was  being  assured  from  Rome  that  it  was  respect  for  him  which  had 
prevented  Pius  from  bringing  Elizabeth's  case  before  the  assembled 
Fathers.  She  was  protected  from  the  anathema,  which  in  1563  might 
have  been  a  serious  matter,  by  conflicting  policies  of  the  worldliest  sort. 
The  only  member  of  the  English  episcopate  who  was  at  Trent,  the 
fugitive  Marian  Bishop  of  St  Asaph,  might  do  his  worst  ;  but  the  safe 
course  for  ecclesiastical  power  was  to  make  a  beginning  with  Jeanne 
d'Albret  and  wait  to  see  whether  any  good  would  come  of  the  sentence. 
Ferdinand,  however,  begged  Elizabeth  to  take  pity  on  the  imprisoned 
prelates,  and  she  quartered  most  of  them  upon  their  Protestant  succes- 
sors. The  English  Catholics  learnt  from  the  Pope,  whom  they  consulted 
through  the  Spanish  ambassadors  at  London  and  Rome,  that  they 
ought  not  to  attend  the  English  churches  (October,  1562).  As  a 
matter  of  expediency  this  was  a  questionable  decision.  It  is  clear  that 
the  zealous  Romanists  over-estimated  the  number  of  those  Englishmen 
whose  preference  for  the  old  creed  could  be  blown  into  flame.  The 
State  religion  was  beginning  to  capture  the  neutral  nucleus  of  the  nation, 
and  the  irreconcilable  Catholics  were  compelled  to  appear  as  a  Spanish 
party  secretly  corresponding  with  the  Pope  through  Quadra  and  Vargas. 

Simultaneously  with  the  Parliament  a  Convocation  of  the  province 
of  Canterbury  was  held  (January  12,  1563),  and  its  acts  may  be  said  to 
complete  the  great  outlines  of  the  Anglican  settlement.  A  delicate 
task  lay  before  the  theologians  :  no  other  than  that  of  producing  a 
confession  of  faith.  Happily  in  this  case  also  a  restoration  was  possible. 
In  the  last  months  of  Edward's  reign  a  set  of  forty-two  Articles  had 
been  published  ;  in  the  main  they  were  the  work  of  Cranmer.  In  1568 
Parker  laid  a  revised  version  of  them  before  the  assembled  clergy,  and, 
when  a  few  more  changes  had  been  made,  they  took  durable  shape 
and  received  the  royal  assent.  A  little  more  alteration  at  a  later  day 
made  them  the  famous  "Thirty-nine  Articles."  To  all  seeming  the 
leaders  of  English  theological  thought  were  remarkably  unaninu)us. 

A  dangerous  point  had  been  passed.  Just  at  the  moment  when 
the  Roman  Church  was  demonstrating  on  a  grand  scale  its  power  of 
defining  dogma,  its  adversaries  were  becoming  always  less  hopeful  of 


588  The  Convocation  of  1563  [l563 

Protestant  unanimity.  In  particular,  as  Elizabeth  was  often  hearing 
from  Germany,  the  dispute  about  the  Lord's  Supper  was  not  to  be 
composed,  and  a  quarrel  among  divines  was  rapidly  becoming  a  cause 
of  quarrel  among  Princes.  Well  intentioned  attempts  to  construct 
elastic  phrases  had  done  more  harm  than  good,  and  it  was  questionable 
whether  the  Religious  Peace  would  comprehend  the  Calvinising  Palsgrave. 
As  causes  of  political  union  and  discord,  all  other  questions  of  theology 
were  at  this  moment  of  comparatively  small  importance  ;  the  line  which 
would  divide  the  major  part  of  the  Protestant  world  into  two  camps, 
to  be  known  as  Lutheran  and  Calvinist,  was  being  drawn  by  theories 
of  the  Holy  Supper.  It  is  usual  and  for  the  great  purposes  of  history 
it  is  right  to  class  the  Knoxian  Church  of  Scotland  as  Calvinian,  though 
about  Predestination  its  Confession  of  Faith  is  as  reticent  as  are  the 
English  Articles.  Had  it  been  possible  for  the  English  Church  to  leave 
untouched  the  hotly  controverted  question,  the  Queen  would  have  been 
best  pleased.  She  knew  that  at  Hamburg,  Westphal,  a  champion  of 
militant  Lutheranism,  "  never  ceased  in  open  pulpit  to  rail  upon  England 
and  spared  not  the  chiefest  magistrates  "  ;  it  was  he  who  had  denounced 
the  Marian  exiles  as  "the  devil's  martyrs."  Since  the  first  moment  of 
her  reign  Christopher  of  Wiirttemberg  and  Peter  Paul  Vergerio  had 
been  endeavouring  to  secure  her  for  the  Lutheran  faith.  Jewel,  who  was 
to  be  the  Anglican  apologist,  heard  with  alarm  of  the  advances  made  by 
the  ex-Bishop  of  Capo  d'Istria  ;  and  the  godly  Duke  had  been  pained  at 
learning  that  no  less  than  twenty-seven  of  the  Edwardian  Articles  swerved 
from  the  Augustan  standard.  Very  lately  he  had  urged  the  Queen  to 
stand  fast  for  a  Real  Presence.  Now,  Lutheranism  was  by  this  time 
politically  respectable.  When  there  was  talk  of  a  Bull  against  Elizabeth, 
the  Emperor  asked  how  a  distinction  was  to  be  made  between  her  and 
the  Lutheran  Princes,  and  could  take  for  granted  that  no  Pope  with 
his  wits  about  him  would  fulminate  a  sentence  against  those  pillars 
of  the  Empire,  Augustus  of  Saxony  and  Joachim  of  Brandenburg.  When 
a  few  years  later  (1570)  a  Pope  did  depose  Elizabeth,  he  was  careful 
to  accuse  her  of  participation  in  "  the  impious  mysteries  of  Calvin," 
by  which,  no  doubt,  he  meant  the  Cene.  But  though  the  Augustan 
might  be  the  safer  creed,  she  would  not  wish  to  separate  herself  from 
the  Huguenots  or  the  Scots,  and  could  have  little  hope  of  obtaining 
from  her  Bishops  a  declaration  that  would  satisfy  the  critical  mind  of 
the  good  Christopher.  Concessions  were  made  to  him  at  points  where 
little  was  at  stake  ;  words  were  taken  from  his  own  Wiirttemberg  Con- 
fession. When  the  perilous  spot  was  reached,  the  English  divines 
framed  an  Article  which,  as  long  experience  has  shown,  can  be  signed 
by  men  who  hold  different  opinions  ;  but  a  charge  of  deliberate  ambi- 
guity could  not  fairly  be  brought  against  the  Anglican  fathers.  In 
the  light  of  the  then  current  controversy  we  may  indeed  see  some  desire 
to  give  no  needless  offence  to  Lutherans,  and  apparently  the  Queen 


1563]  The  Thirty-nine  Articles  589 

suppressed  until  1571  a  phrase  which  would  certainly  have  repelled 
them  ;  but,  even  when  this  phrase  was  omitted,  Beza  would  have 
approved  the  formula,  and  it  would  have  given  greater  satisfaction  at 
Geneva  and  Heidelberg  tlian  at  Jena  or  Tiibingen.  A  papistical  con- 
troversialist tried  to  insert  a  wedge  which  would  separate  a  Lutheran 
Parker  from  an  Helvetic  Grindal ;  but  we  find  Parker  hoping  that 
Calvin,  or,  if  not  Calvin,  then  Vermigli  will  lead  the  Reformers  at 
Poissy,  and  the  only  English  Bishop  to  whom  Lutheran  leanings  can 
be  safely  attributed  held  aloof  from  his  colleagues  and  was  for  a  while 
excommunicate.  It  was  left  for  Elizabeth  herself  to  suggest  by  cross 
and  candles  that  (as  her  German  correspondents  put  it)  she  was  living 
"  according  to  the  divine  light,  that  is,  the  Confession  of  Augsburg," 
while  someone  assured  the  Queen  of  Navarre  that  these  obnoxious 
symbols  had  been  removed  from  the  royal  chapel.  As  to  "  the  sacrifices 
of  masses,"  there  could  be  no  doubt.  The  anathema  of  Trent  was 
frankl)^  encountered  by  "blasphemous  fable."  Elizabeth  knew  that 
her  French  ambassador  remained  ostentatiously  seated  when  the  Host 
was  elevated,  for  "  reverencing  the  sacrament  was  contrary  to  tlie  usages 
established  by  law  in  England." 

Another  rock  was  avoided.  Ever  since  1532  there  had  been  in  the 
air  a  project  for  an  authoritative  statement  of  English  Canon  Law.  In 
Edward's  day  that  project  took  the  shape  of  a  book  (^Reformatio  Legum 
Ecclesiasticarum')  of  which  Cranmer  and  Peter  Martyr  were  the  cliief 
authors,  but  which  had  not  received  the  King's  sanction  when  death  took 
him.  During  Elizabeth's  first  years  we  hear  of  it  again ;  but  nothing 
decisive  was  done.  The  draft  code  that  has  come  down  to  us  has 
every  fault  that  it  could  have.  In  particular,  its  list  of  heresies  is 
terribly  severe,  and  apparently  (but  this  has  been  doubted)  the  obstinate 
heretic  is  to  go  the  way  that  Cranmer  went :  not  only  the  Romanists 
but  some  at  least  of  the  Lutherans  might  have  been  relinquished  to 
the  secular  arm.  Howbeit,  the  scheme  fell  through.  Under  a  statute 
of  Henry  VIII  so  much  of  the  old  Canon  Law  as  was  not  contrariant  nor 
repugnant  to  the  Word  of  God  or  to  Acts  of  the  English  Parliament 
was  to  be  administered  by  the  Courts  of  the  English  Church.  Practically 
this  meant,  that  the  officials  of  the  Bishops  had  a  fairly  free  hand  in 
declaring  law  as  they  went  along.  They  were  civilians ;  the  academic 
study  of  the  Canon  Law  had  been  prohibited ;  they  were  not  in  the  least 
likely  to  contest  the  right  of  the  temporal  legislature  to  regulate 
spiritual  affairs.  And  the  hands  of  the  Queen's  ecclesiastical  com- 
missioners were  free  indeed.  Large  as  were  the  powers  with  which 
she  could  entrust  them  by  virtue  of  the  Act  of  Supremacy,  she  pro- 
fessedly gave  them  yet  larger  powers,  for  tliey  might  punish  offenders 
by  fine  and  imprisonment,  and  this  the  old  Courts  of  the  Church  could 
not  do.  A  constitutional  question  of  the  first  magnitude  was  to  arise 
at  this  point.     But  during  the  early  years  of  the  reign  the  commissioners 


590  The  Vesticvrian  controversy  [1563-6 

seem  to  be  chiefly  employed  in  depriving  papists  of  their  benefices,  and 
this  was  lawful  work. 

But  while  there  was  an  agreeable  harmony  in  dogma  and  little 
controversy  over  polity,  the  quarrel  about  ceremonies  had  begun.  In 
the  Convocation  of  1563,  resolutions,  which  would  have  left  the  posture 
of  the  communicants  to  the  discretion  of  the  Bishops  and  would  have 
abolished  the  observance  of  Saints'  days,  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  baptism 
and  the  use  of  organs,  were  rejected  in  the  Lower  House  by  the  smallest 
of  majorities.  It  was  notorious  that  some  of  the  Bishops  favoured  only 
the  simplest  rites  ;  five  deans  and  a  dozen  archdeacons  petitioned  against 
the  modest  surplice.  But  for  its  Supreme  Governor,  the  English  Cliurch 
would  in  all  likelihood  have  carried  its  own  purgation  far  beyond  the 
degree  that  had  been  fixed  by  the  secular  legislature.  To  the  Queen, 
however,  it  was  of  the  first  importance  that  there  should  be  no  more 
changes  before  the  face  of  the  Tridentine  enemy,  and  also  that  her 
occasional  professions  of  Augustan  principles  should  have  some  visible 
support.  The  Bishops,  though  at  first  with  some  reluctance,  decided  to 
enforce  the  existing  law  ;  and  in  course  of  time  conservative  sentiment 
began  to  collect  around  the  rubrics  of  the  Prayer  Book.  However,  there 
were  some  men  who  were  not  to  be  pacified.  The  "  Vestiarian  contro- 
versy "  broke  out.  Those  who  strove  for  a  worship  purified  from  all 
taint  of  popery  (and  who  therefore  were  known  as  "Puritans")  "scrupled" 
the  cap  and  gown  that  were  to  be  worn  by  the  clergy  in  daily  life,  and 
"  scrupled "  the  surplice  that  was  to  be  worn  in  church.  Already  in 
1565  resistance  and  punishment  had  begun.  At  Oxford  the  Dean  of 
Christ  Church  was  deprived,  and  young  gentlemen  at  Cambridge  dis- 
carded the  rags  of  the  Roman  Antichrist. 

In  the  next  year  the  London  clergy  were  recalcitrant.  The  Spanish 
ambassador  improved  the  occasion.  In  reply,  Elizabeth  told  him  that 
the  disobedient  ministers  were  "  not  natives  of  the  country,  but  Scotsmen, 
whom  she  had  ordered  to  be  punished."  Literal  truth  she  was  not 
telling,  and  yet  there  was  truth  of  a  sort  in  her  words.  From  this  time 
onwards,  the  historian  of  the  English  Church  must  be  often  thinking 
of  Scotland,  and  the  historian  of  the  Scottish  Church  must  keep  England 
ever  in  view.  Two  kingdoms  are  drifting  together,  first  towards  a 
"  personal  "  and  then  towards  a  "  real "  Union  ;  but  two  Churches  are 
drifting  apart  into  dissension  and  antagonism.  The  attractions  and 
repulsions  that  are  involved  in  this  process  fill  a  large  page  in  the 
annals  of  Britain ;  they  have  become  plain  to  all  in  the  age  of  the 
Bishops'  Wars  and  the  Westminster  Assembly ;  but  they  are  visible 
much  earlier.  The  attempt  to  Scoticise  the  English  Church,  which 
failed  in  1660,  and  the  attempt  to  Anglicise  the  Scottish  Church,  which 
failed  in  1688,  each  of  these  had  its  century. 

For  a  while  there  is  uncertainty.  At  one  moment  Maitland  is  sure 
that  the  two  kingdoms  have  one  religion  ;  at  another  (March,  1563) 


1553-60]        The  Churches  of  England  and  Scotland         591 

he  can  tell  the  Bishop  of  Aquila  that  there  are  great  differences ;  but 
undoubtedly  in  1560  the  prevailing  belief  was  that  the  Protestants  of 
England  and  Scotland  were  substantially  at  one ;  and,  many  as  were  to 
be  the  disputes  between  them,  they  remained  substantially  at  one  for 
the  greatest  of  all  purposes  until  there  was  no  fear  that  eitlier  realm 
would  revert  to  Rome.  From  the  first  the  Reforming  movement  in  the 
northern  kingdom  had  been  in  many  ways  an  Englisli  movement.  Then 
in  1560  Reformation  and  national  deliverance  had  been  effected  simul- 
taneously by  the  aid  of  English  gold  and  English  arms.  John  Knox 
was  a  Scot  of  Scots,  and  none  but  a  Scot  could  have  done  what  he  did; 
but,  had  he  died  in  1558  at  the  age  of  fifty-three,  his  name  would  have 
occurred  rather  in  English  than  in  Scottish  books,  and  he  might  have 
disputed  with  Hooper  the  honour  of  being  the  progenitor  of  tlie  English 
Puritans.  The  congregation  at  Geneva  for  which  he  compiled  his  Prayer 
Book  was  not  Scottish  but  English.  His  Catholic  adversaries  in  Scotland 
said  that  he  could  not  write  good  Scots.  Some  of  his  principal  lieu- 
tenants were  Englishmen  or  closely  connected  with  England.  John 
Willock,  while  he  was  "  Superintendent "  (Knoxian  Bishop)  of  Glasgow, 
was  also  parson  of  Loughborough.  "  Mr.  Goodman  of  England  "  had 
professed  divinity  at  Oxford,  and  after  his  career  in  Scotland  was  an 
English  archdeacon,  though  a  troublesome  Puritan.  John  Craig  had 
been  tutor  in  an  English  family,  and,  instead  of  talking  honest  Scots, 
would  "knap  suddrone."  But  further,  Knox  had  signed  the  English 
Articles  of  1553,  and  is  plausibly  supposed  to  have  modified  their  word- 
ing. A  Catholic  controversialist  of  Mary's  day  said  that  "  a  runagate 
Scot  "  had  procured  that  the  adoration  of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament 
should  be  put  out  of  the  English  Prayer  Book.  To  that  book  in  1559 
Knox  had  strong  objections  ;  he  detested  ceremonies ;  the  Coxian  party 
at  Frankfort  had  played  him  a  sorry  trick  and  he  had  just  cause  of 
resentment;  but  there  was  nothing  doctrinally  wrong  with  tlie  Book. 
It  was  used  in  Scotland.  In  1560  a  Frenchman  whom  Randolph  took  to 
church  in  Glasgow,  and  who  had  previously  been  in  Elizabeth's  chapel, 
saw  great  differences,  but  heard  few,  for  the  prayers  of  the  Englisli  Book 
were  said.  Not  until  some  years  later  did  "the  Book  of  Geneva" 
(Knox's  liturgy)  become  the  fixed  standard  of  worship  for  the  Scottish 
Church.  The' objection  to  all  prescript  prayers  is  of  later  date  and 
some  say  that  it  passes  from  England  into  Scotland.  Tliis  Genevan  Use 
had  been  adopted  by  the  chaplain  of  Elizabeth's  forces  at  Havre,  and, 
though  he  was  bidden  to  discontinue  it,  he  was  fortliwith  appointed  to 
the  deanery  of  Durham.  A  Puritan  movement  in  England  there  was 
likely  to  be  in  any  case.  The  arguments  of  both  parties  were  already 
prepared.  The  Leipzig  Interim,  the  work  of  the  Elector  Maurice,  had 
given  rise  to  a  similar  quarrel  among  the  Lutherans,  between  Fhacians 
on  the  one  side  and  Philipians  on  the  other,  over  those  rites  and 
ornaments  which  were  "  indifferent "  in  themselves,  but  had,  as  some 


592  The  beginnings  of  Puritanism  [i560-70 

thought,  been  soiled  by  superstition.  The  English  exiles  who  returned 
from  Zurich  and  Geneva  would  dislike  cap,  gown,  and  surplice  ;  but  their 
foreign  mentors  counselled  submission;  BuUinger  was  large-minded,  and 
Calvin  was  politic.  Scotland,  however,  was  very  near,  and  in  Scotland 
this  first  phase  of  Puritanism  was  in  its  proper  place.  So  long  as  Mary 
reigned  there  and  plotted  there,  the  Protestant  was  hardly  an  established 
religion ;  and,  had  Knox  been  the  coolest  of  schemers,  he  would  have 
endeavoured  to  emphasise  every  difference  between  the  old  worship  and 
the  new.  It  was  not  for  him  to  make  light  of  adiaphora ;  it  was  for 
him  to  keep  Protestant  ardour  at  fever  heat.  Maitland,  who  was  a 
cool  schemer,  made  apology  to  Cecil  for  Knox's  vehemence :  "  as  things 
are  fallen  out,  it  will  serve  to  good  purpose."  And  yet  it  is  fairly 
certain  that  Knox  dissuaded  English  Puritans  from  secession.  In  his 
eyes  the  Coxian  Church  of  Eugland  might  be  an  erring  sister,  but 
still  was  a  twin  sister,  of  the  Knoxian  Church  of  Scotland. 

Elizabeth's  resistance  to  the  Puritan  demands  was  politic.  The 
more  Protestant  a  man  was,  the  more  secure  would  be  his  loyalty  if 
Rome  were  aggressive.  It  was  for  her  to  appeal  to  the  "neutral  in 
religion  "  and  those  "  faint  professors  "  of  whom  her  Bishops  saw  too 
many.  It  is  not  perhaps  very  likely  that  surplices  aud  square  caps 
won  to  her  side  many  of  those  who  cared  much  for  the  old  creed. 
Not  the  simplest  and  most  ignorant  papist,  says  Whitgift  to  the 
Puritans,  could  mistake  the  Communion  for  the  Mass  :  the  Mass  has  been 
banished  from  England  as  from  Scotland:  we  are  full  as  well  Reformed 
as  are  the  Scots.  But  Elizabeth  feared  frequent  changes,  was  glad  to 
appear  as  a  merely  moderate  Reformer,  and  meant  to  keep  the  clergy 
well  in  hand.  Moreover,  in  Catholic  circles  her  cross  and  candles  pro- 
duced a  goodimpression.  When  she  reproved  Dean  Nowellfor  inveighing 
against  such  things,  this  was  soon  known  to  Cardinal  Borromeo,  and  he 
was  not  despondent  (April  21,  1565).  Even  her  dislike  for  a  married 
clergy,  which  seems  to  have  been  the  outcome  of  an  indis criminating 
misogyny,  was  favourably  noticed.  It  encouraged  the  hope  tliat  she 
might  repent,  and  for  some  time  Rome  was  unwilling  to  quench  this 
plausibly  smoking  flax.  But  her  part  was  difficult.  The  Puritans  could 
complain  that  they  were  worse  treated  than  Spanish,  French,  and  Dutch 
refugees,  whose  presence  in  England  she  liberally  encouraged.  Casio- 
doro  de  Reyna,  Nicolas  des  Gallars,  and  Utenhove,  though  the  Bishop 
of  London  was  their  legal  "  superintendent,"  were  allowed  a  liberty  that 
was  denied  to  Humphry  and  Sampson;  there  was  one  welcome  for 
Mrs  Matthew  Parker  and  another  for  Madame  la  Cardinale. 

The  controversy  of  the  sixties  over  rites  and  clothes  led  to  the 
controversy  of  the  seventies  over  polity,  until  at  length  Presbyterianism 
and  Episcopalianism  stood  arrayed  against  each  other.  But  the  process 
was  gradual.  We  must  not  think  that  Calvin  had  formulated  a  Presby- 
terian system,  which  could  be  imported  ready-made  from  Geneva  to 


1560]  Preshyterianism  and  Ejnscopalianisin  593 

Britain.  In  what  is  popularly  called  Presbyterianism  there  are  various 
elements.  One  is  the  existence  of  certain  presbyters  or  elders,  who  are 
not  pastors  or  ministers  of  the  Word,  but  who  take  a  larger  or  smaller 
part  in  the  government  of  the  Church.  This  element  may  properly  be 
called  Calvinian,  though  the  idea  of  some  sucli  eldership  had  occurred  to 
other  Reformers.  Speculations  touching  the  earliest  history  of  the 
Christian  Church  were  combined  with  a  desire  to  interest  the  laity  in  a 
rigorous  ecclesiastical  discipline.  But  Calvin  worked  with  tlie  materials 
that  were  ready  to  his  hand  and  was  far  too  wary  to  raise  polity  to  the 
rank  of  dogma.  The  Genevan  Church  was  essentially  civic  or  municipal ; 
its  Consistory  is  very  much  like  a  committee  of  a  town  council.  This 
could  not  be  the  model  for  a  Church  of  France  or  of  Scotland,  which 
would  contain  many  particular  congregations  or  churches.  Granted  that 
these  particular  Churches  will  be  governed  by  elders,  very  little  has  yet 
been  decided  :  we  may  have  the  loosest  federation  of  autonomous  units, 
or  the  strictest  subordination  of  the  parts  to  some  assembly  which  is  or 
represents  the  whole.  Slowly  and  empirically,  the  problem  was  solved  with 
somewhat  different  results  in  France,  Scotland,  and  the  Low  Countries. 
As  we  have  said,  the  month  which  saw  Knox  land  in  Scotland  saw  a 
French  Church  taking  shape  in  a  national  Synod  that  was  being  secretly 
held  at  Paris.  Already  Frenchmen  are  setting  an  example  for  constituent 
assemblies  and  written  constitutions.  Knox,  who  had  been  edifying  the 
Church  of  Dieppe — that  Dieppe  which  was  soon  to  pass  into  Elizabeth's 
hands — stood  in  the  full  current  of  the  French  movement ;  but,  like  his 
teacher,  he  had  no  iron  system  to  impose.  Each  particular  congregation 
would  have  elders  besides  a  pastor  ;  there  would  be  some  general  assembly 
of  the  whole  Church  ;  but  Knox  was  not  an  ecclesiastical  jurist.  The 
First  Book  of  Discipline  (1560)  decides  wonderfully  little  ;  even  the 
structure  of  the  General  Assembly  is  nebulous  ;  and,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  all  righteous  noblemen  seem  to  be  welcome  therein.  It  graduallj- 
gives  itself  a  constitution,  and,  while  a  similar  process  is  at  work  in 
France,  other  jurisdictional  and  governmental  organs  are  developed, 
until  kirk-session,  presbytery,  synod  and  assembly  form  a  concentric 
system  of  Courts  and  councils  of  which  Rome  herself  might  be  proud. 
But  much  of  this  belongs  to  a  later  time  ;  in  Scotland  it  is  not  Knoxian 
but  Melvillian. 

A  mere  demand  for  some  ruling  elders  for  the  particular  Cliurches 
was  not  likely  to  excite  enthusiasm  or  antagonism.  England  knew 
that  plan.  The  curious  Church  of  foreign  refugees,  organised  in  tlie 
London  of  Edward  VI's  days  under  the  presidency  of  John  Laski,  had 
elders.  Cranmer  took  great  interest  in  what  he  probably  regarded  as  a 
fruitful  experiment,  and  the  Knoxian  Churcli  has  some  traits  which,  so 
good  critics  think,  tell  less  of  Geneva  than  of  the  Polish  but  cosmopolitan 
nobleman.  Dr  Home,  Elizabeth's  Bishop  of  Wincliester,  had  been  the 
pastor  of  a  Presbyterian  flock  of  English  refugees  at  Frankfort.     With  a 


594  Parity  and  prelacy  [i560-70 

portion  of  that  flock  lie  had  quarrelled,  not  for  being  Presbyterian,  but 
because  the  Presbyterianism  of  this  precocious  conventicle  was  already 
taking  that  acutely  democratic  and  distinctly  uncalvinian  form,  in  which 
the  elders  are  the  annually  elected  officers  of  a  congregation  which  keeps 
both  minister  and  elders  well  under  control.  Among  Englishmen  a 
drift  towards  Congregationalism  appears  almost  as  soon  as  the  ruling 
elder. 

The  enthusiasm  and  antagonism  were  awakened  by  a  different  cry  :  it 
was  not  a  call  for  presbyters,  but  a  call  for  "  parity,"  for  an  equality 
among  all  the  ministers  of  God's  Word,  and  consequently  for  an  abolition 
of  all  "prelacy."  As  a  battle  cry  this  is  hardly  Calvinian  ;  nor  is  it 
Knoxian  ;  it  is  first  audible  at  Cambridge.  The  premisses,  it  is  true,  lay 
ready  to  the  hand  of  anyone  who  chose  to  combine  them.  The  major 
was  that  Protestant  principle  which  refers  us  to  the  primitive  Church. 
The  minor  was  a  proposition  familiar  to  the  Middle  Age  :  —  originally 
there  was  no  difference  between  the  presbyter  and  the  episeopus.  Every 
student  of  the  Canon  Law  knew  the  doctrine  that  the  prelacy  of  Bishops 
is  founded,  not  on  divine  command,  but  on  a  "custom  of  the  Church." 
When  the  Puritan  said  that  the  episcopal  jurisdiction  was  of  popish 
origin,  he  agreed  with  Laynez  and  the  Pope  ;  at  least,  as  had  been  amply 
shown  at  Trent,  the  divine  right  of  Bishops  was  a  matter  over  which 
Catholic  doctors  could  quarrel  bitterly.  But  the  great  Reformers  had 
been  chary  of  their  words  about  ecclesiastical  polity  ;  there  were  many 
possibilities  to  be  considered,  and  the  decision  would  rest  with  Princes 
or  civic  Councils.  The  defenders  of  Anglican  episcopacy  occasionally 
told  the  Puritan  that  he  was  not  a  good  Calvinist,  and  even  Beza 
could  hardly  be  brought  by  British  pressure  to  a  sufficiently  dogmatic 
denunciation  of  prelacy.  As  to  Knox,  it  is  clear  that,  though  he 
thought  the  English  dioceses  too  large,  he  had  no  radical  objection  to 
such  prelacy  as  existed  in  England.  Moreover,  the  Church  that  he 
organised  in  Scotland  was  prelatic,  and  there  is  but  little  proof  that  he 
regarded  its  prelatic  constitution  as  a  concession  to  merely  temporary 
needs.  The  word  "  bishop  "  was  avoided  (in  Scotland  there  still  were 
lawful  Bishops  of  another  creed)  ;  but  over  the  "dioceses"  stand  "superin- 
tendents" (the  title  comes  from  Germany),  who,  though  strictly  account- 
able to  the  general  assembly,  are  distinctly  the  rulers  of  the  diocesan 
clergy.  Between  superintendent  and  minister  there  is  no  "  parity  "  ;  the 
one  may  command,  the  other  must  obey.  The  theory  that  valid  orders 
can  be  conferred  by  none  but  a  Bishop,  Knox  would,  no  doubt,  have 
denied  ;  but  some  at  all  events  of  the  contemporary  English  Bishops 
would  have  joined  him  in  the  denial. 

Apparently  Thomas  Cartwright,  a  young  professor  of  divinity  at 
Cambridge,  spoke  the  word  (1570)  that  had  not  yet  been  spoken  in 
Scotland.  Cambridge  was  seething  with  Puritanism ;  the  Bishops  had  been 
puttingthe  vestiarian  law  in  force;  and  the  French  Church  had  declared 


ioG0-70]  Church  and  State  in  Scotland  595 

for  parity.  "  There  ought  to  be  an  equality  "  :  presbyter  and  Bishop 
were  once  all  one.  But  if  the  demand  for  parity  was  first  heard  south  of 
the  Tweed,  it  was  soon  echoed  back  by  Scotland  ;  and  thenceforth  the 
English  Puritan  was  often  looking  northward.  In  Scotland  much  had 
been  left  unsettled.  From  August,  1561,  to  May,  1508,  Mary  Stewart  i« 
there  ;  Rizzio  and  Darnley,  Bothwell  and  Moray,  Lethington  and  Knox, 
are  on  the  stage  ;  and  we  hold  our  breath  while  the  tragedy  is  played. 
We  forget  the  background  of  unsolved  questions  and  uncertain  law.  Is 
the  one  lawful  religion  the  Catholic  or  the  Protestant  ?  Are  there  two 
established  Churches,  or  is  one  Church  established  and  another  endowed  ? 
There  is  an  interim :  or  rather,  an  armed  truce.  The  Queen  had  not 
confirmed  the  statutes  of  1560,  though  mass-mongers  were  occasionally 
imprisoned.  Nothing  decisive  had  been  done  in  the  matter  of  tithes 
and  kirk-lands  and  advowsons.  The  Protestant  ministers  and  super- 
intendents were  receiving  small  stipends  which  were  charged  upon  the 
ecclesiastical  revenues  ;  but  the  Bishops  and  Abbots,  some  of  whom  were 
Protestant  ministers,  had  not  been  ousted  from  their  temporalities  or  their 
seats  in  Parliament,  and,  as  vacancies  occurred,  the  bishoprics  were  con- 
ferred upon  new  occupants,  some  of  whom  were  Catholics.  The  General 
Assembly  might  meet  twice  a  year ;  but  John  Hamilton  still  went  to 
Parliament  as  a  reverend  father  in  God  and  primate  of  Scotland.  If 
Mary  had  succeeded  in  re-establishing  Catholicism,  we  should  probably 
have  said  that  it  had  never  been  disestablished.  And  when  she  had 
been  deposed  and  a  Parliament  held  in  her  son's  name  had  acknowledged 
the  Knoxian  Church  to  be  "  the  immaculate  spouse  of  Christ,"  much  was 
still  unsettled.  What  was  to  be  done  with  the  bishoprics  and  abbacies 
and  with  the  revenues  and  seats  in  Parliament  that  were  involved  there- 
with ?  Grave  questions  of  civil  and  ecclesiastical  polity  were  open,  and 
a  large  mass  of  wealth  went  a-begging  or  illustrated  the  beatitude  of 
possession.  Then  in  the  seventies  we  on  the  one  hand  see  an  attempt  to 
Anglicise  the  Church  by  giving  it  Bishops,  who  will  sit  in  Parliament 
and  be  somewhat  more  prelatic  than  were  Knox's  superintendents,  and 
on  the  other  hand  we  hear  a  swelling  cry  for  parity. 

To  many  a  Scot  prelacy  will  always  suggest  another  word  of  evil 
sound  :  to  wit,  Erastianism.  The  link  is  Anglican.  The  name  of  the 
professor  of  medicine  at  Heidelberg  — it  was  Thomas  Liiber,  or  in  Greek 
Erastus  —  won  a  fame  or  infamy  in  Britain  that  has  been  denied  to  it 
elsewhere.  And  in  some  sort  this  is  fair,  for  it  was  an  English  Puritan 
who  called  him  into  the  field  ;  and  after  his  deatli  his  manuscript  book 
was  brought  to  England  and  there  for  the  first  time  printed.  His  Prince, 
the  Elector  Palatine  Frederick  III,  was  introducing  into  his  dominions, 
in  the  place  of  the  Lutheranism  which  had  prevailed  there,  the  theology 
that  flowed  from  Zurich  and  Geneva  ;  images  were  being  destroyed 
and  altars  were  giving  place  to  tables.  This,  as  Elizabeth  knew  when 
the  Thirty  Nine  Articles  lay  before  her,  was  a  very  serious  change  ;  it 


596  Erastus  and  Erastianism  [1568-72 

strained  to  breaking-point  the  professed  unanimity  of  the  Protestant 
Princes.  Theology,  however,  was  one  thing,  Church-polity  another  ; 
and  for  all  the  Genevan  rigours  Frederick  was  not  yet  prepared.  But 
to  Heidelberg  for  a  doctor's  degree  came  an  English  Puritan,  George 
Withers,  and  he  stirred  up  strife  there  by  urging  the  necessity  of  a 
discipline  exercised  by  pastor  and  elders  (June,  1568).  Erastus  an- 
swered him  by  declaring  that  excommunication  has  no  warrant  in  the 
Word  of  God  ;  and  further  that,  when  the  Prince  is  a  Christian,  there 
is  no  need  for  a  corrective  jurisdiction  which  is  not  that  of  the  State, 
but  that  of  the  Church.  This  sowed  dissension  between  Zurich  and 
Geneva  :  between  Bullinger,  the  friend  of  the  English  Bishops,  and  Beza, 
the  oracle  of  the  Puritans.  Controversy  in  England  began  to  nibble 
at  the  Royal  Supremacy  ;  and  in  Scotland  the  relation  between  the 
State  (which  until  1567  had  a  papistical  head)  and  the  Knoxian  Church, 
was  of  necessity  highly  indeterminate.  Knox  had  written  sentences 
which,  in  our  rough  British  use  of  the  term,  were  Erastian  enough  ; 
and  a  great  deal  of  history  might  have  been  changed,  had  he  found 
in  Scotland  a  pious  prince  or  even  a  pious  princess,  a  Josiah  or  even 
a  Deborah.  As  it  fell  out,  the  Scottish  Church  aspired  to,  and  at  times 
attained,  a  truly  medieval  independence.  Andrew  Melvill's  strain  of 
language  has  been  compared  with  that  of  Gregory  VII ;  so  has  Thomas 
Cart  Wright's  ;  but  the  Scottish  Church  had  an  opportunity  of  resuming 
ancient  claims  which  was  denied  to  the  English.  In  1572  an  oath  was 
imposed  in  Scotland ;  the  model  was  English ;  but  important  words 
were  changed.  The  King  of  Scots  is  "  Supreme  Governor  of  this  realm 
as  well  in  things  temporal  as  in  the  conservation  and  purgation  of 
religion."  The  Queen  of  England  is  "  Supreme  Governor  of  this  realm 
as  well  in  all  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical  things  or  causes  as  temporal." 
The  greater  continuity  of  ecclesiastical  history  is  not  wholly  on  one 
side  of  the  border.  The  charge  of  popery  was  soon  retorted  against 
the  Puritans  by  the  Elizabethan  divines  and  their  Helvetian  advisers  :  — 
Your  new  presbyter  in  his  lust  for  an  usurped  dominion  is  but  too  like 
old  priest. 

In  controversy  Avith  the  Puritans  the  Elizabethan  religion  gradually 
assumed  an  air  of  moderation  which  had  hardly  belonged  to  it  from  the 
first ;  it  looked  like  a  compromise  between  an  old  faith  and  a  new.  It  is 
true  that  from  the  beginning  of  her  reign  Elizabeth  distrusted  Calvin  ; 
and  when  she  swore  that  she  never  read  his  books  she  may  have  sworn 
the  truth.  That  blast  of  the  trumpet  had  repelled  her.  Not  only  had 
"  the  regiment  of  women  "  been  attacked,  but  Knox  and  Goodman  had 
advocated  a  divine  right  of  rebellion  against  idolatrous  Princes.  Calvin 
might  protest  his  innocence  ;  but  still  this  dangerous  stuff  came  from  his 
Geneva.  Afterwards,  however,  he  took  an  opportunity  of  being  service- 
able to  the  Queen  in  the  matter  of  a  book  which  spoke  ill, of  her  father 
and  mother.     Then  a  pretty  message  went  to  him  and  he  was  bidden  to 


1561-72]       The  English  Church  and  the  Puritans  597 

feel  assured  of  her  favour  (September  18, 1561).  Moreover,  in  German 
history  Elizabeth  appears  as  espousing  the  cause  of  oppressed  Calvinists 
against  the  oppressing  Lutherans.  Still  as  time  went  on,  when  the 
Huguenots,  as  she  said,  had  broken  faith  with  her  about  Havre  and 
Calais,  and  the  attack  on  "her  officers,"  the  Bishops,  was  being  made 
in  the  name  of  the  Genevan  discipline,  her  dislike  of  Geneva,  its  works, 
and  its  ways,  steadily  grew.  Though  in  the  region  of  pure  theology 
Calvin's  influence  increased  apace  in  England  and  Scotland  after  his 
death,  and  Whitgift,  the  stern  repressor  of  the  Puritans,  was  a  remorse- 
less predestinarian,  still  the  BisJiops  saw,  albeit  with  regret,  that  they 
had  two  frontiers  to  defend,  and  that  they  could  not  devote  all  their 
energy  to  the  confutation  of  the  Louvainists. 

Then  some  severed,  or  half -severed,  bonds  were  spliced.  Parker  was 
a  lover  of  history,  and  it  was  pleasant  to  sit  in  the  chair  of  Augustine^ 
seeing  to  editions  of  yElfric's  Homilies  and  the  Chronicles  of  Matthew 
Paris.  But  the  work  was  slowly  done,  and  foreigners  took  a  good  share 
in  it.  Hadrian  Saravia,  who  defended  English  episcopacy  against  Beza, 
was  a  refugee,  half  Spaniard,  half  Fleming.  Pierre  Baron  of  Cambridge, 
who  headed  a  movement  against  Calvin's  doctrine  of  the  divine  decrees, 
was  another  Frenchman,  another  pui)il  of  the  law-school  of  Bourges. 
And  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  at  Elizabeth's  accession  the  Genevan 
was  not  the  only  model  for  a  radically  Reformed  Church.  The  fame  of 
Zwingli's  Zurich  had  hardly  yet  been  eclipsed,  and  for  many  years  the 
relation  between  the  Anglican  and  Tigurine  Chui-ches  was  close  and 
cordial.  A  better  example  of  a  purely  spiritual  power  could  hardly  be 
found  than  the  influence  that  was  exercised  in  England  by  Zwingli's 
successor  Henry  Bullinger.  Bishops  and  Puritans  argue  their  causes 
before  him  as  if  he  were  the  judge.  So  late  as  1586  English  clergymen 
are  required  to  peruse  his  immortal  Decades.  There  was  some  gratitude 
in  the  case.  A  silver  cup  with  verses  on  it  had  spoken  Elizabeth's 
thanks  for  the  hospitality  that  he  had  shown  to  Englishmen.  But  that 
was  not  all ;  he  sympathised  with  Elizabeth  and  her  Bishops  and  her 
Erastianism.  He  condemned  "  the  English  fool "  who  broke  the  peace 
of  the  Palatinate  by  a  demand  for  the  Genevan  discipline.  When  the 
cry  was  that  the  congregation  should  elect  its  minister,  the  Puritan 
could  be  told  how  in  an  admirably  reformed  republic  Protestant  pastors 
were  still  chosen  by  patrons  who  might  be  papists,  even  by  a  Bisliop  of 
Constance  who  might  be  the  Pope's  own  nephew  and  a  Cardinal  to  boot, 
for  a  Christian  magistracy  would  see  that  this  patronage  was  not  abused. 
And  then  when  the  bad  day  came  and  the  Pope  hurled  his  thunderbolt, 
it  was  to  Bullinger  that  the  English  Bishops  looked  for  a  learned  defence 
of  their  Queen  and  their  creed.  Modestly,  but  willingly,  he  undertook 
the  task  :  none  the  less  willingly  perhaps,  because  Pius  V  had  seen  fit 
to  couple  Elizabeth's  name  with  Calvin's,  and  this  was  a  controver- 
sialist's trick  which  Zurich   could   expose.      Bullinger   knew  all  the 


598  First  years  of  Elizabeth  [i5Gi-72 

Puritan  woes  and  did  not  like  surplices  ;  he  knew  and  much  disliked 
the  "  semi-popery  "  of  Lutheran  Germany  ;  but  in  his  eyes  the  Church 
of  England  was  no  half-way  house.  As  to  Elizabeth,  he  saw  her  as  no 
lukewarm  friend  of  true  religion,  but  as  a  virgin-queen  beloved  of  God, 
whose  wisdom  and  clemency,  whose  felicity  and  dexterity  were  a  marvel 
and  a  model  for  all  Christian  Princes  (March  12,  1572). 

The  felicity  and  dexterity  are  not  to  be  denied.  The  Elizabethan 
religion  which  satisfied  BuUinger  was  satisfying  many  other  people  also  ; 
for  (to  say  nothing  of  intrinsic  merits  or  defects)  it  appeared  as  part  and 
parcel  of  a  general  amelioration.  It  was  allied  with  honest  money, 
cheap  and  capable  government,  national  independence,  and  a  reviving 
national  pride.  The  long  Terror  was  overpast,  at  least  for  a  while  ; 
the  flow  of  noble  blood  was  stayed  ;  the  axe  rusted  at  the  Tower.  The 
long  Elizabethan  peace  was  beginning  (1563),  while  France  was  ravaged 
by  civil  war,  and  while  more  than  half  the  Scots  looked  to  the  English 
Queen  as  the  defender  of  their  faith.  One  Spaniard  complains  that 
these  heretics  have  not  their  due  share  of  troubles  (November,  1562)  ; 
another,  that  they  are  waxing  fat  upon  the  spoil  of  the  Indies  (August, 
1565).  The  England  into  which  Francis  Bacon  was  born  in  1561  and 
William  Shakespeare  in  1564  was  already  unlike  the  England  that  was 
ruled  by  the  Queen  of  Spain. 


CHAPTER   XVII 

THE   SCANDINAVIAN  NORTH 

The  Scandinavian  nations  had  entered  somewhat  late  into  the  general 
stream  of  European  history,  and,  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  were  still  not  a  little  behind  the  rest  of  Western  Europe  in 
civilisation.  But  they  were  early  brought  into  contact  with  the  Refor- 
mation movement,  and  nowhere  were  its  effects  more  generally  felt  or 
more  far-reaching.  In  order  to  see  to  what  extent  this  was  the  case, 
some  attention  must  be  paid  to  their  earlier  history. 

It  was  not  till  the  tenth  century  that  Denmark,  Norway,  and  Sweden 
began  to  exist  as  single  monarchies  ;  and  it  was  under  their  early  Kings 
that  Christianity,  first  introduced  some  time  previously,  came  to  be  the 
religion  of  all  their  people.  From  this  time  forward,  although  they 
were  frequently  devastated  and  rent  asunder  by  internal  warfare,  the 
three  kingdoms  may  be  said  to  have  taken  their  part,  each  in  its  own 
way,  in  European  history.  The  Swedes,  pressed  by  their  heathen 
neighbours  to  the  north  and  north-east,  were  at  first  unable  to  make 
much  headway.  The  Norwegians,  fully  occupied  by  their  activities 
beyond  the  seas,  in  Iceland,  in  parts  of  Scotland  and  Ireland,  and  even 
in  far-away  Greenland,  never  acquired  much  strength  at  home.  Den- 
mark was  usually  the  most  powerful  kingdom  of  the  three.  Under  the 
Kings  of  the  Estridsen  line  the  Danes  vindicated  their  independence  of 
the  Empire,  and  conquered  large  territories  from  the  heathen  Wends 
and  Esthonians  on  the  shores  of  the  Baltic  ;  in  fact,  there  was  a  time, 
under  Valdemar  the  Victorious  (1204-41),  when  the  Baltic  was  to  all 
intents  and  purposes  a  Danish  lake.  But  the  capture  and  imprisonment 
of  Valdemar  by  Count  Henry  of  Schwerin  gave  a  blow  to  their  power 
from  which  it  never  recovered.  The  increasing  influence  of  the  Teutonic 
knights  and  the  Livonian  knights  of  the  sword  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
rapid  advance  of  Sweden  under  its  Folkung  dynasty  on  the  other,  still 
further  shattered  it.  The  Danes  were  further  hampered  by  the  com- 
mercial and  naval  rivalry  of  the  Hanseatic  League,  and  by  frequent 
border  warfare  with  the  duchy  of  Holstein.  Altogether,  it  looked  for 
a  time  as  though  Sweden  must  take  the  place  of  Denmark  as  the  chief 


600  The  Union  of  Kalmar  [1363-1448 

power  of  the  north.  But  although  the  Swedes  gradually  extended 
their  sway  over  Dalecarlia  and  Fmland,  their  further  extension  was  pre- 
vented by  the  advance  of  the  Russians  of  Novgorod  to  the  shores  of  the 
Gulf  of  Finland ;  and  thus  the  peoples  of  the  north  were  once  more  thrown 
back  upon  themselves. 

After  several  unsuccessful  attempts  at  dynastic  union,  the  three 
kingdoms  were  at  length  united.  In  1363  Valdemar  III  (Atterdag) 
of  Denmark  had  given  his  daughter  Margaret  in  marriage  to  Hakon  of 
Norway.  On  his  death  in  1375  Margaret's  son  Olaf  became  King  of 
Denmark.  Five  years  later,  on  the  death  of  his  own  father,  Olaf  suc- 
ceeded to  the  crown  of  Norway  ;  and  Margaret  became  the  real  ruler 
of  both  realms  in  the  name  of  her  son.  About  the  same  time  she  laid 
claim  to  the  crown  of  Sweden  in  right  of  her  late  husband  Hakon  ; 
and,  although  the  claim  was  at  first  very  shadowy,  it  became  formidable 
when  the  Swedish  nobles  espoused  her  cause.  The  King,  Albert  of 
Mecklenburg,  was  defeated  and  made  prisoner  at  the  battle  of  Falkoping ; 
and  the  Treaty  of  Lindholm  (1393)  left  her  undisputed  mistress  of 
Sweden.  Thus  the  three  realms  were  united  under  Queen  Margaret,  for 
her  son  Olaf  had  died  in  1387.  The  jjersonal  union  before  long  became 
a  constitutional  one.  In  1397  Margaret  caused  her  grand-nephew  Erik 
to  be  crovv^ned  King  at  Kalmar  ;  and  on  that  occasion  there  was  con- 
cluded, by  nobles  representing  the  three  kingdoms,  the  famous  Union 
of  Kalmar,  by  which  Sweden,  Norway,  and  Denmark  were  declared  to 
be  for  ever  united  under  one  King,  each  retaining  its  own  laws  and 
customs.  But  the  Union  was  not  regularly  promulgated  or  made  widely 
known,  its  terms  were  vague  and  indefinite,  and  they  opened  up  more 
questions  than  they  solved.  It  was  provided  that  a  son  of  the  reigning 
King  should  be  chosen  if  possible  ;  but  nothing  was  said  as  to  the  method 
by  which  the  three  kingdoms  were  to  participate  in  the  election.  It  was 
provided  that  all  should  take  up  arms  against  the  general  enemy ;  but  no 
reference  was  made  to  the  carrying  out  of  projects  which  concerned  one 
of  the  three  only.  It  is  plain  that  nothing  but  pressing  common  interests 
or  a  strong  ruler  could  render  such  an  agreement  permanent,  and  this 
was  precisely  what  was  wanting.  On  the  one  hand,  Erik  and  his 
successors  really  ruled  in  the  interests  of  Denmark  ;  on  the  other,  the 
condition  of  Sweden,  practically  one  of  anarchy,  made  any  settled 
government  Avell-nigh  impossible.  Revolts  were  of  frequent  occurrence, 
and  before  long  the  Danish  governors  were  driven  out,  and  Karl 
Knudson,  the  leader  of  the  higher  nobility,  became  administrator 
(^BdJcsfoerestandare)  of  Sweden.  On  the  accession  of  the  House  of 
Oldenburg  to  the  throne  of  Denmark  in  1448,  Karl  Knudson  was  pro- 
claimed King  of  Sweden,  and  soon  afterwards  of  Norway  also.  Christian  I 
soon  regained  his  hold  over  the  latter  realm  ;  but  from  this  time  forward 
the  Danish  Kings  were  seldom  able  to  make  good  their  claims  over 
Sweden,  which  continued  to  be  ruled  by  Swedish  administrators  until 


1100-1520]  Changes  in  the  united  kingdoms  601 

1520,  when  the  death  of  Sten  Sture  the  younger  placed  Sweden  for  tlie 
moment  entirely  in  the  hands  of  Christian  11  of  Denmark.  On  tlie 
other  hand,  the  Oldenburg  line  had  gained  ground  elsewhere.  In  14G0 
Christian  I  was  chosen  as  Duke  of  Schleswig  and  Count  of  Holstein. 
But  the  great  revolt  of  the  Ditmarsch  peasants,  ending  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Danish  array,  with  two  Counts  of  Oldenburg  and  the  flower 
of  the  Schleswig-Holstein  nobility,  in  1500,  further  weakened  the  Dan- 
ish throne,  and  indirectly  helped  to  break  up  the  Union  of  Kalmar. 

The  general  effect  of  the  changes  which  had  taken  place  in  the 
Scandinavian  kingdom  since  the  twelfth  century  had  been  to  strengthen 
the  power  of  the  nobles  at  the  expense  of  the  King  and  the  bonder  or 
free  peasants.  Neither  in  Denmark  nor  in  Sweden  was  there  a  law  of 
heredity  ;  and  every  election  was  secured  at  the  cost  of  a  "capitulation" 
which  involved  a  certain  weakening  of  the  royal  prerogative.  In 
order  to  obviate  the  evils  of  a  disputed  succession,  the  Kings  frequently 
attempted  to  secure  an  election  in  their  own  lifetime  and  left  large 
appanages  to  their  younger  sons :  with  the  result  that  the  effort  to 
transform  these  personal  fiefs  into  hereditary  possessions  often  led  to 
civil  wars,  and  still  further  weakened  the  Crown.  Under  pressure 
from  the  nobles  the  royal  castles  were  step  by  step  demolished  every- 
where, and  the  royal  domain  was  gradually  encroached  upon.  The 
Rigsraad,  or  Council  of  State,  consisting  entirely  of  the  nobles  and  the 
higher  clergy,  altogether  supplanted  the  ancient  assemblies  of  the  peo- 
ple as  the  final  legislative  authority.  In  Sweden  King  Albert  (Count 
of  Mecklenburg)  was  little  more  than  the  President  of  this  Council. 
Even  in  Denmark  things  were  not  much  better ;  and  they  did  not  im- 
prove. Under  the  Oldenburg  Kings  the  Court  was  German  rather  than 
Danish,  and  its  influence  was  none  the  greater  on  that  account.  Nor, 
owing  to  the  privileges  of  the  Hanseatic  towns,  was  there  a  great  mer- 
chant class,  to  act  as  a  counterpoise  to  the  nobles.  And  as  for  the 
bonder,  formerly  the  most  important  class  of  all,  their  condition  was 
pitiable  indeed.  By  degrees  their  rights  were  encroached  upon,  till, 
from  free  and  noble-born  small  proprietors,  they  became  mere  peasants. 
In  Denmark  they  were  at  length  compelled  to  have  recourse  to  the  prac- 
tice of  commendation,  which  ended,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  in  a  widespread  system  of  serfage. 

The  power  of  the  clergy  had  grown  pari  passu  with  that  of  the 
nobles.  Down  to  the  twelfth  century,  indeed,  the  Scandinavian  Bishops 
were  only  suffragans  of  the  see  of  Bremen.  It  was  not  till  1104  tliat 
the  see  of  Lund,  in  the  Danish  province  of  Skaane,  was  raised  to  metro- 
political  rank,  with  jurisdiction  over  all  the  bishoprics  of  the  three 
kingdoms  ;  and  it  was  only  in  1152  that  the  famous  mission  took  phice 
of  the  Cardinal  of  Albano,  Nicholas  Breakspeare  (afterwards  Pope 
Adrian  IV),  which  gave  to  the  nortliern  Churclies  their  permanent 
character.     Under  his  guidance  Nidaros  (Trondhjem)  was  made  the 


602  The  Reformation  in  Denmark  [1250-1515 

metropolitical  see  of  Norway,  and  soon  afterwards  Upsala  was  raised  to 
a  similar  position  in  Sweden  ;  the  payment  of  Roma  shat  was  introduced, 
and  the  ecclesiastical  system  of  the  northern  nations  was  remodelled  on 
the  lines  which  prevailed  at  the  time  in  other  parts  of  Western  Christen- 
dom ;  though  it  was  not  till  1250  that  a  papal  Bull  took  the  choice  of 
the  Bishops  from  the  people  and  gave  it  to  the  Chapters.  From  this 
time  forward  the  power  and  the  riches  of  the  clergy  had  rapidly  in- 
creased. They  held  large  fiefs  in  all  three  countries ;  it  is  said  that 
more  than  half  of  Denmark  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Bishops,  and  Copen- 
hagen itself  was  built  on  a  fief  of  the  Bishop  of  Roskilde.  Their  posses- 
sions, like  those  of  the  nobles,  were  exempt  from  taxation,  nor  were  they 
liable  to  the  same  restrictions  with  regard  to  trade  as  the  people  at  large. 
With  some  conspicuous  exceptions,  they  were  not  less  opposed  to  the 
Kings  than  were  the  nobles;  quarrels  respecting  clerical  immunities 
were  frequent,  and  they  generally  ended  in  the  infliction  of  ecclesi- 
astical censures,  followed  by  the  surrender  of  the  King  at  discretion 
and  the  payment  of  an  indemnity.  As  a  rule,  the  higher  clergy  had 
been  trained  abroad,  and  were  not  less  foreign  in  feeling  and  sympathies 
than  the  Court  itself.  Owing  partly  to  difficulties  in  securing  confir- 
mation at  Rome,  partly  to  the  exaggerated  importance  that  was  attached 
to  their  civil  and  constitutional  functions.  Bishops  elect  frequently 
remained  unconsecrated  for  years,  their  spiritual  functions  being  carried 
out  by  others.  Naturally,  abuses  were  far  from  uncommon  amongst 
them,  and  there  was  not  much  love  lost  between  them  and  the  people 
at  large.  Indeed,  the  success  of  the  Reformation,  both  in  Denmark  and 
in  Sweden,  was  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  it  put  an  end  to  the  power 
of  the  clergy  and  despoiled  them  of  their  possessions. 


I.    THE  REFORMATION  IN  DENMARK 

The  accession  of  Christian  II  in  1513  marks  the  beginning  of  a  new 
era.  A  man  of  great  natural  gifts  but  violent  passions,  his  father  had 
given  him  an  education  which  at  once  developed  his  love  for  the  people 
and  his  self-love,  and  at  the  same  time  made  him  one  of  the  most  learned 
monarchs  of  the  day.  He  was  sent  to  Norway  to  put  down  a  rebellion 
in  1502,  and  as  regent  there  he  received  his  apprenticeship  in  government 
during  a  series  of  turbulent  years.  His  marriage  in  1515  with  Isabella, 
sister  of  the  future  Emperor  Charles  V,  obtained  for  him  an  influence  in 
Europe  such  as  for  centuries  no  other  King  of  Denmark  had  enjoyed. 
But  he  was  cruel  and  treacherous,  both  by  nature  and  of  deliberate 
policy.  These  characteristics  had  already  shown  themselves  in  Norway : 
they  were  present  throughout  his  reign,  and  after  ten  years  they  helped 
to  drive  him  from  his  beloved  Denmark.  Thus,  although  he  introduced 
'I limy  notable  changes,  he  himself  was  overthrown  by  the  reaction  to 


1512-20]  Christian  II  in  Sweden  G03 

which  they  gave  rise  ;  and  they  were  only  carried  out  in  their  entirety 
by  others  after  his  downfall. 

Christian  had  himself  reconquered  Norway  for  his  fatlier  :  at  his  own 
accession  he  found  Sweden  practically  independent.  On  the  death  of 
the  administrator  Svante  Sturc  in  1512  the  R'ujsraad  had  chosen  the  old 
Erik  Trolle  in  his  place  and  had  decided  in  favourof  union  with  Denmark. 
But  a  popular  party  led  by  Hemming  Gadd,  the  Bishop  of  Linka'ping, 
had  risen  against  him  and  set  up  Sten  Sture  the  younger  in  his  stead  ; 
who,  being  a  wise  and  statesmanlike  leader,  soon  obtained  the  u^jper 
hand.  There  was  still  a  strong  party  opposed  to  him  however,  under 
the  leadership  of  Gustaf,  the  son  of  Erik  Trolle  and  Archbishop 
of  Upsala.  In  the  course  of  the  civil  war  which  followed  Gustaf  was 
besieged  in  his  castle  of  Sttekeborg  near  Stockholm.  He  at  once  appealed 
to  the  Danes  for  help  ;  and  his  assailants  were  excommunicated  by 
Archbishop  Berger  of  Lund,  by  virtue  of  the  authority  which  he  claimed 
as  Primate  of  Scandinavia.  Thereupon  Sten  Sture  and  the  Ri;/sraad 
resolved  that  Trolle  should  be  no  longer  recognised  as  Archbishop,  and 
that  he  should  be  imprisoned  and  his  castle  razed  to  the  ground.  Gustaf 
at  once  appealed  to  Pope  Leo  X,  who  approved  the  excommunication 
of  Sten  Sture  and  called  upon  Christian  to  enforce  it.  From  1517 
onwards,  therefore.  Christian  was  endeavouring  by  negotiation  or 
otherwise  to  take  possession  of  Sweden.  At  first  he  had  little  success, 
excepting  that  in  1518,  after  an  attack  on  Stockholm  which  failed 
of  its  object,  he  suggested  an  interview  with  Sten  Sture,  demanded 
hostages  for  his  own  safety,  and  then  carried  them  off  to  Denmark, 
Bishop  Gadd  and  a  young  man  named  Gustaf  Eriksson  among  them.  In 
the  following  year  he  returned  to  Sweden  with  a  large  army  of  merce- 
naries. On  January  18, 1520,  Sten  Sture  was  defeated  in  a  battle  fought 
on  the  ice  on  Lake  Asunden  and  so  severely  wounded  that  he  died  some 
weeks  after.  A  second  battle  before  Upsala  left  all  Sweden  in  Gustaf's 
hands  except  Stockholm,  which  was  valiantly  defended  by  Sten  Sture's 
widow,  Christina  Gyllenstjerna  ;  and  the  promise  of  a  general  amnesty 
made  in  Christian's  name  by  his  general,  Otte  Krumpen,  together  with 
the  persuasions  of  Gadd,  who  had  gone  over  to  the  King's  side,  at  length 
prevailed  upon  her  to  open  the  gates.  Christian  entered  Stockholm, 
and  was  crowned  King  of  Sweden  on  Sunday,  November  4,  1520. 

The  event  that  followed  is  the  blackest  in  Christian's  life.  On  the 
Wednesday,  during  the  coronation  festivities,  the  Swedish  magnates  and 
the  authorities  of  Stockholm  were  suddenly  summoned  into  the  citadel. 
Then  Diederik  Slaghoek,  a  Westphalian  follower  of  the  King's,  and  Jens 
Andersen,  surnamed  Beldenak,  the  Bishop  of  Odense,  stood  forth  in  tlie 
name  of  Gustaf  Trolle  and  demanded  reparation  for  the  wrongs  which, 
as  they  alleged,  had  been  inflicted  on  him.  Christian  at  once  called  for 
the  names  of  those  who  had  signed  the  act  of  deposition  and  committed 
them  to  prison  ;  the  only  exceptions  being  Bishop  Brask  of  Linkieping, 


604  The  Stockholm  Bath  of  Blood  [1520 

who  bad  signed  under  protest,  and  another  Bishop  who  now  joined 
himself  witli  Trolle  as  accuser.  The  following  day,  November  8,  at 
nine  o'clock,  they  were  brought  before  a  Court  of  twelve  ecclesiastics, 
one  of  whom  was  Trolle,  who  thus  became  a  judge  in  his  own  cause. 
The  single  question  was  put  to  them  by  Beldenak,  whether  men  who 
had  raised  their  hands  against  the  Pope  and  the  Holy  Roman  Church 
were  not  heretics  ?  They  could  give  but  one  answer.  Thereupon  they 
were  told  that  they  had  condemned  themselves,  and  were  declared  guilty 
of  notorious  heresy.  On  the  very  same  da}',  at  noon,  they  were  brought 
forth  into  the  market-place  and  there  beheaded  one  by  one  before  the 
eyes  of  the  citizens.  The  Bishops  of  Strengna^s  and  Skara  were  the  first  to 
suffer ;  they  were  followed  by  the  rest  of  the  signatories,  amongst  whom  was 
the  father  of  Gustaf  Eriksson,  afterwards  King  of  Sweden  ;  and  these  by 
others  of  the  principal  nobles  and  citizens,  who  showed  their  sympathy  too 
plainly,  until  the  square  ran  with  blood.  A  spectator  counted  more  than 
ninety  corpses  before  the  day  was  done  ;  and  the  ghastly  work  was  not 
confi.ned  to  one  time  or  place.  The  bodies  lay  where  they  had  fallen  for 
three  days,  after  which  they  were  conveyed  outside  the  town  and  burnt  ; 
the  bodies  of  Sten  Sture  and  of  his  young  son,  born  since  his  excommu- 
nication, being  exhumed  and  thrown  upon  the  pyre.  It  was  hoped  that 
this  terrible  deed,  which  is  known  as  the  Stockholm  bath  of  blood 
{Stoekholms  Blodbad),  had  secured  Sweden  to  the  Danes  ;  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  as  it  has  been  said,  the  Union  of  Kalmar  was  drowned  in  it 
for  ever.  Fierce  revolts  broke  out  everywhere,  and  before  long  Sweden 
was  independent  under  its  own  King  Gustavus. 

Christian  was  a  more  successful  ruler  at  home  than  he  had  been  in 
Sweden.  He  was  v/ell  aware  of  the  evils  under  which  Denmark  was 
groaning,  and  was  resolved  to  provide  a  remedy.  As  the  price  of  his 
election  to  the  Crown  he  had  been  compelled  to  accept  not  only  the 
conditions  which  had  bound  his  father,  but  others  even  more  onerous. 
One  of  these  gave  the  judicial  power  entirely  into  the  hands  of  the 
magnates  ;  another  nullified  the  royal  right  of  conferring  nobilit}^  ;  the 
last  of  all  provided  that  if  he  broke  his  agreement  in  any  particular, 
"then  shall  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  kingdom  faithfully  resist  the 
same  without  loss  of  honour  and  without  in  any  wise  by  so  doing 
breaking  their  oath  of  fealty  to  us."  But  from  the  first  Christian 
treated  his  "  capitulation  "  as  a  dead  letter,  and  endeavoured  in  every 
way  to  increase  the  power  of  the  burghers  and  the  peasants.  Himself 
brought  up  in  the  household  of  a  burgher,  Hans  Metzenheim,  surnaraed 
Bogbinder,  he  surrounded  himself  with  advisers  of  ignoble  and  often 
of  foreign  birth  :  Sigbrit,  the  mother  of  his  beautiful  Dutch  mis- 
tress Dyveke,  Diederik  Slaghok,  who  has  been  mentioned  already,  a 
Malrao  merchant  named  Hans  Mikkelsen,  and  many  more.  Mother 
Sigbrit,  as  she  was  called,  a  woman  of  great  capacity,  was  his  chief 
counsellor   in    all   fiscal   and  commercial  matters.     By  her  advice  he 


1519-22]  Christian  IPs  reign  in  Denmark  605 

disregarded  the  Rigaraad  altogether,  subjected  the  higher  orders  to 
taxation,  and  violated  all  their  most  cherished  privileges.  Nor  was  it 
otherwise  with  the  clergy,  who  soon  found  that  in  him  they  had  a 
master.  He  levied  from  them  by  arbitrary  and  lawless  methods  the 
money  which  he  really  needed,  but  could  not  obtain  in  any  legal  way ; 
Beldenak  in  particular  was  fleeced  unmercifully.  Meanwhile  he  skilfully 
availed  himself  of  the  jealousy  between  them  and  the  nobles,  who  could 
not  forget  that  many  of  them,  including  Archbishop  Berger  and  Bishop 
Beldenak,  were  not  nobly  born,  in  order  to  overturn  the  power  of  both. 
For  the  time  it  seemed  as  if  he  had  succeeded ;  and  two  great  collections 
of  laws,  the  so-called  Secular  and  Ecclesiastical  Code,  which  he  put  forth 
in  1521  and  1522  on  his  own  authority,  without  submitting  them  to 
the  Rvjsraad,  might  seem  to  have  marked  the  downfall  of  the  aristocratic 
power.  But  in  little  more  than  a  year  they  had  been  publicly  burned 
and  their  author  was  a  fugitive. 

But  Christian's  work  was  not  merely  destructive.  The  people  at 
large  found  in  him  a  careful  and  wise  ruler,  who  scrutinised  every  detail 
of  civil  life  and  government  and  was  never  weary  of  working  for  their 
good.  His  reforms  of  municipal  government  were  at  once  elaborate  and 
rigorous.  He  built  great  ships  and  put  down  piracy ;  he  made  wise 
treaties  with  foreign  Powers.  He  extended  commercial  privileges  to  his 
burghers,  and  restricted  those  of  the  Hanseatic  towns,  endeavouring  to 
make  Copenhagen  the  centre  of  the  Baltic  trade  ;  and  with  this  object  in 
view  he  encouraged  Dutch  merchants  to  found  houses  there,  and  extended 
a  warm  welcome  to  the  rich  banking-house  of  the  Fuggers.  He  brought 
Flemish  gardeners  to  Denmark  in  order  that  they  might  teach  his  people 
horticulture,  and  established  them  in  the  little  island  of  Amager,  where 
their  descendants  are  to  this  day.  He  abolished  the  old  "  strand  rights  " 
and  rights  of  wreck,  and  decreed  that  all  possible  assistance  should  be 
given  to  ships  in  peril  and  to  shipwrecked  mariners  ;  and  when  the 
Jutland  Bishops  remonstrated  with  him,  saying  that  there  was  nothing 
in  the  Bible  against  wrecking.  Christian  answered,  "  Let  the  lord- 
prelates  go  back  and  study  the  eighth  commandment."  He  caused 
uniform  weights  and  measures  to  be  used  throughout  his  dominions ;  he 
took  steps  for  the  improvement  of  the  public  roads,  and  made  the  first 
attempt  at  the  creation  of  a  postal  system.  He  abolished  tlie  worst 
evils  of  serfage,  and  made  provision  for  the  punishment  of  cruel  masters. 
His  laws  on  behalf  of  morals  and  of  public  order  are  enlightened  and 
wise  ;  he  abolished  the  death  penalty  for  witchcraft ;  he  founded  a  system 
for  the  relief  of  the  sick.  He  did  his  utmost  for  tlie  encouragement  of 
learning.  The  University  of  Copenhagen,  authorised  by  Pope  Martin  V 
in  1419,  actually  founded  by  Christian  I  in  1478  with  three  professors 
only,  of  law,  theology,  and  medicine,  first  became  important  under 
Christian  II.  He  founded  a  Carmelite  House  in  Copenhagen,  which  was 
to  maintain   a   graduate  in  divinity  who  should  lecture  daily  in  tlie 


606  Begiimings  of  Reform  [1517-21 

University ;  and  the  famous  Paul  Eliae  or  Eliaesen  (Povel  Helgesen), 
a  student  of  Erasmus'  writings  and  of  Luther's  earlier  works,  and  an 
earnest  seeker  after  Catholic  reform,  who  has  been  not  inaptly  styled 
the  Colet  of  Denmark,  came  from  Elsinore  to  be  the  first  head 
lecturer.  Christian  directed  that  schools  should  be  opened  for  the  poor 
throughout  his  dominions  ;  he  exerted  himself  to  provide  better  school- 
books  ;  he  actually  went  so  far  as  to  enact  that  education  should  be 
compulsory  for  the  burghers  of  Copenhagen  and  all  the  other  large  towns 
of  Denmark. 

Meanwhile  Christian  had  been  turning  his  attention  to  matters 
strictly  ecclesiastical.  Here  too  it  cannot  be  said  that  he  was  anything 
but  an  opportunist,  and  it  would  be  superfluous  to  credit  him  with  any 
very  pronounced  convictions  in  favour  of  the  Reformed  doctrines ;  but 
there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  earnestness  with  which  he  set  to  work  to 
correct  practical  abuses.  As  early  as  1517  there  had  come  to  Denmark 
a  papal  envoy  named  Giovanni  Angelo  Arcimboldo,  afterwards  Arch- 
bishop of  Milan,  with  a  commission  to  sell  Indulgences,  the  right  to 
act  under  which  he  purchased  from  the  King  for  1100  gulden.  It  was 
just  at  the  time  when  Christian  was  engaged  in  negotiations  with 
Sweden ;  and  he  resolved  to  make  use  of  Arcimboldo  as  an  intermediary. 
Soon  however  he  discovered  that  the  envoy,  apparently  in  pursuance  of 
secret  instructions  from  the  Pope,  was  negotiating  independently  with 
Sten  Sture.  Arcimboldo  managed  to  escape  to  Liibeck  with  part  of  his 
booty  ;  but  the  King  at  once  gave  orders  for  the  seizure  of  what  was  left, 
and  found  himself  in  possession  of  a  rich  harvest  in  money  and  in  kind. 
That  this  action  did  not  involve  any  breach  with  the  existing  eccle- 
siastical system  is  plain  from  the  fact  that  the  victims  of  the  terrible 
"  Stockholm  bath  of  blood "  were  put  to  death  by  Christian,  not  as 
traitors  to  the  King,  but  as  rebels  against  the  Holy  See. 

But  he  had  already  gone  further  than  this.  In  1519  he  wrote  to 
his  maternal  uncle,  Frederick  of  Saxony,  begging  him  to  send  to  the 
University  of  Copenhagen  a  theologian  of  the  school  of  Luther  and 
Carlstadt.  Frederick  sent  Martin  Reinhard,  who  arrived  at  Copenhagen 
late  in  1520,  and  began  preaching  in  the  church  of  St  Nicholas.  But 
Reinhard  unfortunately  knew  no  Danish,  and  his  sermons  had  to  be 
interpreted,  it  is  said  by  Paul  Eliaesen.  The  effect  was  not  happy  :  the 
sermons  lost  much  of  their  force,  and  the  preacher's  gestures,  divorced 
from  his  words,  seemed  grotesque  and  meaningless.  At  the  next  carnival 
the  canons  of  St  Mary's  took  advantage  of  the  fact  by  dressing  up  a  child 
and  setting  him  to  imitate  the  preacher.  What  was  more  serious,  Paul 
began  to  find  that  he  had  no  sympathy  with  Luther's  developed  position. 
Mocked  by  the  people  and  bereft  of  his  interpreter,  Reinhard  was  sent 
back  to  Germany.  Christian  now  endeavoured  to  attract  Luther  himself ; 
and,  although  this  proved  impossible,  Carlstadt  came  for  a  short  visit. 
But  the  Edict  of  Worms  (May,  1521),  which  placed  Luther  and  his 


1521-2]         Proposals  of  Christian  II for  Reform  607 

followers  under  the  ban  of  the  Empire,  was  a  hint  too  significant  to 
be  neglected,  and  for  a  time  no  more  is  heard  of  foreign  preachers  in 
Copenhagen. 

Within  Denmark  itself,  however,  things  were  not  standing  still  ; 
and  Christian's  codes  of  laws,  already  referred  to,  were  full  of  bold 
provisions  for  ecclesiastical  reform.  The  monasteries  were  again  sub- 
jected to  episcopal  visitation.  Clerical  non-residence,  which,  partly 
owing  to  local  difficulties,  was  commoner  in  Norway  and  Denmark  than 
elsewhere,  was  stringently  forbidden.  To  make  an  end  of  the  ignorant 
"priest-readers"  (laese-praester)  of  whom  the  Danish  Church  was  full,  no 
candidate  for  holy  Oi-ders  was  to  be  ordained  unless  he  had  studied  at 
the  University  and  had  shown  that  he  understood  and  could  explain 
"  the  Holy  Gospel  and  epistle  "  in  Danish.  The  clergy  were  not  to 
acquire  landed  property  or  to  receive  inheritances,  "  at  least  unless  they 
will  follow  the  precept  of  St  Paul,  who  in  his  First  Epistle  to  Timothy 
counsels  them  to  be  the  husband  of  one  wife,  and  will  live  in  the  holy 
state  of  matrimony  as  their  ancestors  did."  The  state  which  the  Bishops 
were  accustomed  to  keep  up  was  forbidden  :  in  journeying  "  they  shall 
ride  or  travel  in  their  litters,  that  the  people  may  know  them  from  other 
doctors  ;  but  they  shall  not  be  preceded  by  fife  and  drum  to  the  mockery 
of  holy  Church."  The  spiritual  Courts  were  no  longer  to  have  cogni- 
sance of  questions  of  property.  Most  radical  change  of  all,  a  new 
supreme  tribunal  was  to  be  set  up  at  Roskilde,  by  royal  authority  alone, 
consisting  of  "  four  doctors  or  masters  well  learned  in  ecclesiastical  and 
imperial  law,"  the  decisions  of  which,  as  well  ecclesiastical  as  civil,  were 
to  be  final,  the  appeal  to  the  Pope  being  abolished. 

But  Christian's  new  code  never  came  into  operation.  His  position 
was  already  one  of  great  difficulty,  and  the  toils  were  fast  closing  round 
him.  He  was  in  bad  odour  at  Rome,  partly  on  account  of  his  attempted 
reforms,  partly  because  of  the  three  Bishops  whom  he  had  slain  in 
Sweden  ;  for  Hemming  Gadd  had  been  put  to  death  not  long  after  the 
massacre  of  Stockholm,  in  spite  of  his  loyalty  to  the  King.  This  last 
matter  was  arranged  without  much  difficulty.  The  Nuncio  Giovanni 
Francesco  di  Potenza,  whom  Leo  X  had  sent  to  Denmark,  declared 
Christian  innocent  and  found  a  scapegoat  in  Diederik  Slaglioek,  now 
Archbishop  elect  of  Lund.  For  this  and  other  crimes  he  was  condemned 
to  death,  and  burnt  on  January  22,  1522.  But  there  were  other  diffi- 
culties which  could  not  be  met  in  this  way.  The  citizens  of  Liibeck  had 
declared  war,  and  were  soon  devastating  Bornholm  and  threatening 
Copenhagen.  Christian  was  embroiled  in  a  hopeless  contest  in  Sweden. 
He  had  offended  his  father's  brother,  Frederick  of  Schleswig-Holstein,  by 
obtaining  the  investiture  of  the  duchy  at  the  hands  of  Charles  V,  which 
he  now  abandoned  by  the  Treaty  of  Bordesholm  (August).  And  now, 
when  everything  was  against  him  abroad,  the  seething  discontent  at 
home  came  to  a  head.     Late  in  1522  the  nobles  of  Sjiullund  broke  out 


608  Flight  of  Christian  II  [1523-59 

in  open  rebellion.  To  meet  this,  Christian  gathered  together  an  army 
of  peasants,  and  summoned  a  council  of  nobles  {Herredag)  to  meet  at 
Kallundborg.  The  nobles  and  bishops  from  Jutland  failed  to  put  in  an 
appearance,  alleging  that  the  wind  and  time  of  year  made  it  impossible. 
Tliereiipon  he  summoned  them  and  the  representatives  of  the  commons 
to  meet  in  a  national  assembly  (^Riksdag')  at  Aarhuus. 

But  it  was  too  late  :  the  Jutlanders  had  already  assembled  at  Viborg, 
renounced  their  allegiance  to  him,  and  proclaimed  Frederick  King, 
putting  forth  at  the  same  time  a  statement  of  grievances  (March,  1523). 
A  letter  in  which  they  communicated  the  news  to  Christian  reached  him 
early  in  the  following  month.  The  case  was  far  from  desperate.  Norwa}'" 
had  not  declared  against  him  ;  most  of  the  islands  were  still  his,  and 
many  of  the  chief  citadels ;  the  peasants  were  devoted  to  him,  and  so 
were  many  excellent  leaders,  chief  amongst  them  being  the  brave 
Admiral  Soren  Norby.  But  Christian  had  lost  heart.  Every  day 
some  renounced  their  allegiance,  and  an  alliance  which  Frederick  had 
contracted  with  Sweden  and  Liibeck  filled  him  with  alarm.  On  April  13 
he  left  his  capital  and  embarked  for  Flanders  with  his  young  Queen  and 
his  three  little  children,  and  spent  the  next  nine  years  in  exile,  often 
under  great  hardships.  He  continued  vigorously  to  dispute  Frederick's 
throne,  but  without  success,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he  invoked  the  aid 
of  his  powerful  brother-in-law,  and  at  length,  late  in  1529,  was  formally 
reconciled  to  the  Roman  communion.  Two  years  later  he  desired  to 
enter  into  communication  with  Frederick,  and  gave  himself  into  the 
hands  of  his  uncle's  commander,  Knud  Gyldenstjerne,  on  a  safe-conduct. 
But  in  spite  of  this  he  was  thrown  into  the  dungeons  of  Sonderborg, 
where  he  remained  for  seventeen  years,  part  of  the  time  with  no 
companion  but  a  half-witted  Norwegian  dwarf;  and  he  only  left 
Sonderborg  for  a  less  rigorous  captivity  elsewhere,  which  endured  till 
his  death  in  1559. 

Frederick's  new  position  was  no  happy  one.  For  years  his  dominions 
were  torn  asunder  by  civil  war  ;  and  Christian  was  still  recognised  as  the 
lawful  King  by  the  Pope,  the  Emperor,  and  the  Lutherans.  The  new 
King  owed  everything  to  those  who  had  elected  him,  and  concession  was 
naturally  the  order  of  the  day.  To  Norway  he  granted  that  hence- 
forward it  should  be  a  free  elective  monarchy,  as  Denmark  and  Sweden 
were.  To  the  nobles  he  made  even  greater  concessions  than  Christian  II 
had  made  at  his  coronation,  promising  amongst  other  things  that  none 
but  noble-born  Danes  should  be  appointed  to  bishoprics  in  future ; 
whilst  as  regards  the  Church  he  bound  himself  "not  to  permit  any 
heretic,  Luther's  disciple  or  any  other,  to  preach  or  teach,  either  openly 
or  publicly,  against  the  hoi}'  faith,  against  the  most  holy  father  the 
Pope  or  the  Church  of  Rome."  This  last  promise  was  more  than  once 
repeated  subsequently,  in  return  for  subsidies  granted  by  the  clergy ;  but 
both  parties  must  soon  have  come  to  realise  that  a  change  was  coming 


1522-6]  Paul  Eliaesen  and  Ms  folloiuers  609 

whether  they  would  or  no.  And  although  the  actual  settlement  did 
not  take  place  till  after  his  death,  the  reign  of  Frederick  I  saw  the  real 
overthrow  of  the  Church  in  Denmark. 

Although  the  causes  which  brought  this  about  were  political  rather 
than  religious,  they  were  not  entirely  so,  and  there  were  already  not  a 
few  in  Denmark  who  were  propagating  the  new  doctrines.  Paul  Eliaesen 
had  indeed  found  himself  unable  to  go  the  whole  length  with  the 
Lutherans,  and  before  long  received  from  them  the  nickname  of  Paul 
Turncoat  (Povel  Vendekaabe}  for  his  alleged  instability.  But  Paul  was 
neither  a  coward  nor  a  renegade  :  he  is  almost  the  only  representative  in 
the  north  of  that  class  of  earnest  and  enlightened  men  who  desired 
reform,  both  practical  and  doctrinal,  without  any  general  loosening  of 
the  ecclesiastical  system.  It  is  true  that  after  Christian  II  turned  liim 
out  of  his  lectureship  in  1522  a  rich  canonry  was  founded  for  him  by 
Bishop  Lage  Urne  of  Roskilde,  the  duties  of  which  were  to  teach  in  the 
University  and  preach  to  the  people.  But  he  had  lost  his  former  office 
in  consequence  of  a  bold  public  denunciation  of  the  King's  cruelty;  and 
he  was  not  more  flexible  in  the  hands  of  Frederick  I  in  1526,  when  that 
monarch  tried  to  make  him  a  Lutheran  propagandist.  Yet,  although 
he  refused  to  throw  in  his  lot  with  the  extremists,  and  became  more 
decided  in  his  opposition  to  them  as  their  action  became  more  decided, 
he  never  ceased  to  inveigh  against  the  corruptions  of  the  old  order.  He 
translated  selected  tracts  by  Luther  into  Danish,  and  asserted  many  of 
his  earlier  theses,  even  whilst  he  condemned  that  teacher's  later  actions  ; 
and  his  last  effort  at  peace-making,  his  Christian  Reconciliation  and 
Accord,  written  about  1534,  is  an  earnest  plea  for  peace  on  the  basis 
of  the  historic  system  of  the  Church,  with  the  services  in  Danish, 
communion  in  both  kinds,  marriage  of  the  clergy  and  the  like. 

But  although  Paul  could  go  no  further  than  this,  there  were  many 
of  his  disciples  who  went  much  farther.  Chief  amongst  them  was 
Hans  Tausen,  known  as  the  "Danish  Luther."  The  son  of  a  peasant 
of  Fyen  (b.  1494)  he  had  joined  the  Johannite  priory  of  Antvorskov, 
where  his  abilities  soon  won  recognition  and  he  was  sent  abroad.  After 
studying  and  lecturing  at  Rostock  he  was  nominated  professor  of 
theology  at  Copenhagen ;  but  his  Prior,  willing  to  see  him  still  better 
equipped,  sent  him  abroad  again,  and  he  now  studied  at  Cologne  and 
Louvain.  Thence  he  passed  to  Wittenberg  (1523),  where  he  was  listening 
to  Luther's  teaching  with  avidity  when  the  alarmed  Prior  summoned  him 
home  in  1524  and  imprisoned  him.  After  a  time  he  was  transferred  to 
the  Johannite  house  at  Viborg,  in  order  that  the  Prior  there,  the  learned 
Peder  Jensen,  might  show  him  the  error  of  his  ways.  He  soon  won 
Jensen's  confidence,  and  was  permitted  to  preach  to  the  people  after 
vespers.  His  preaching  created  a  great  sensation,  but  soon  caused  the 
prior  to  admonish  and  warn  him  ;  so  one  day,  at  the  end  of  his  sermon, 
Tausen  threw  himself   upon   the   protection  of   his   hearers,  left  the 


610  Dispute  concerning  the  see  of  Lund         [1524-54 

monastery,  and  took  up  his  abode  in  the  house  of  one  of  the  chief 
citizens. 

Here  he  was  joined  by  Jorgen  Sadolin,  who  had  studied  with 
him  under  Luther,  and  whose  sister  he  presently  married ;  and  the  two 
continued  their  irregular  preaching  under  the  eye,  and  in  spite  of  the 
prohibition  of,  the  Bishop,  Jorgen  Friis.  The  same  kind  of  thing  was 
going  on  at  Malmo,  where  under  the  protection  of  the  Burgomaster, 
Jorgen  Kok  "the  moneyer  "  (rnonter)^  one  Klaus  Mortensen  tlie  cooper 
(t(xndehi7ider')  had  begun  preaching  in  the  open  air,  until  the  people 
rose  and  insisted  that  one  of  the  churches  should  be  placed  at  their 
disposal.  And  the  movement  was  spreading  elsewhere.  In  1524  there 
was  printed  a  Danish  version  of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  commonly 
attributed  to  Hans  Mikkelsen,  formerly  Burgomaster  of  Malmo,  now  a 
fugitive  with  the  dethroned  King,  and  which  may  be  in  part  his  work.  It 
was  imported  into  Denmark  in  very  large  quantities,  and  was  largely  read 
by  the  people  in  spite  of  episcopal  prohibition,  until  its  place  was  taken  five 
years  later  by  a  far  better  version.  This  was  the  work  of  the  gentle 
Christian  Pedersen,  known  as  the  father  of  Danish  literature.  He  had 
been  a  canon  of  Lund,  but  followed  Christian  II  into  exile,  and  became 
a  convinced  Lutheran ;  he  returned  to  Denmark  in  1531,  and  spent  the 
rest  of  his  life,  till  his  death  in  1554,  in  literary  work  for  the  cause  of 
the  Reform. 

Such  was  the  state  of  religion  in  Denmark  when  the  struggle  began 
which  led  to  the  overthrow  of  the  Danish  Church.  In  May,  1525,  the 
nobles  complained  to  Frederick  I  that  the  see  of  Lund  had  been  over- 
long  vacant  :  they  pointed  out  that  the  Archbishop  of  Lund  was  "  the 
gate  and  bulwark  between  Denmark  and  Sweden,  as  the  Duke  of  Schleswig 
is  between  Denmark  and  Germany,"  and  begged  the  King  "no  longer  to 
allow  that  the  Church  in  this  land  should  be  thus  dealt  with."  The 
circumstances  were  peculiar.  On  the  death  of  Archbishop  Berger  in 
1519,  the  Chapter  had  elected  their  Dean,  Aage  Sparre ;  the  King  had 
nominated  Jorgen  Skodborg  ;  and  Leo  X,  to  the  great  indignation  of  the 
Danes,  tried  to  appoint  a  young  Italian  by  provision.  All  three  were 
set  aside,  and  Diederik  Slaghok  was  elected  instead ;  but  after  his 
death  there  was  a  deadlock.  Frederick  now  attempted  to  put  an  end 
to  this  by  negotiation  with  the  Pope.  At  first  he  seemed  to  have  suc- 
ceeded ;  Clement  VII  apparently  accepted  the  nomination  of  Skodborg, 
and  confirmed  it.  But  what  had  happened  in  reality  was  that  Skodborg 
had  been  induced  to  buy  out  his  Italian  rival,  and  by  so  doing  had 
recognised  his  claim.  Frederick  was  furious  at  finding  that  he  had  been 
tricked.  On  August  19,  1526,  he  published  a  rescript  by  which  he 
repudiated  the  appointment  of  Skodborg  and  (with  the  consent  of  the 
Rigsraad)  confirmed  the  election  of  Aage  Sparre,  saving  however  Skod- 
borg's  right  of  appeal  to  the  King  and  the  Rigsraad.  The  accustomed 
fees  for  the  confirmation  were  paid  to  the  King  instead  of  the  Pope. 


1522-42]  Lutheran  policy  of  Frederick  I  611 

This  momentous  act  had  consequences  greater,  probably,  than 
those  who  took  part  in  it  anticipated.  The  procedure  in  question  was 
accepted  at  the  Herredag  at  Odense  in  December,  1526,  not  without 
careful  stipulations  for  the  safeguarding  of  ecclesiastical  liberties  ;  and 
from  this  time  forward  no  Danish  Bishop  sought  papal  confirmation.  As 
other  sees  fell  vacant  they  were  tilled  in  the  same  way,  confirmation  being 
given  by  the  King  ;  but  in  each  case  the  Bishop  elect  remained  uncon- 
secrated,  such  purely  episcopal  functions  as  were  required  being  per- 
formed by  one  or  other  of  the  retired  Bishops  or  those  who,  like  the 
Bishop  of  Greenland,  had  never  proceeded  to  their  dioceses.  Meanwhile 
Frederick  was  rapidly  carried  in  the  direction  of  further  change.  His 
son  Christian,  Duke  of  Schleswig,  was  already  a  convinced  Lutheran ; 
and  in  1525  Albert  of  Brandenburg,  the  head  of  the  Teutonic  Order, 
renounced  Catholicism  and  as  Duke  of  Prussia  became  a  suitor  for  the 
hand  of  Christian's  daughter.  The  prospect  of  a  strong  Protestant 
alliance  finally  decided  the  question.  Frederick,  who  had  already  shown 
Lutheran  inclinations,  from  this  time  forward  did  his  utmost  to  propa- 
gate the  new  views  throughout  his  dominions.  Naturally,  not  a  few  of 
his  courtiers  went  with  him  ;  and  in  particular  Mogens  Gjoe,  the  high 
steward  of  Denmark,  became  an  ardent  Reformer. 

His  son  Christian  had  already  shown  the  way  in  Schleswig  and 
Holstein.  A  Lutheran  preacher  named  Hermann  Tast  had  been  work- 
ing at  Husum  since  1522,  and  under  his  influence  and  that  of  other 
German  preachers  whom  Christian  had  brought  in  as  his  chaplains,  the 
new  views  were  spreading  everywhere.  Early  in  1526  Christian  attacked 
Bishop  Munk  of  Ribe,  telling  him  that  he  ought  to  provide  his  diocese 
with  married  priests  who  could  preach  the  Gospel.  The  Bishop  tem- 
perately replied  that  the  Gospel  was  already  preached,  and  that,  with 
regard  to  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  "  when  the  Holy  Church  through- 
out Christendom  adopts  it,  we  will  do  the  same."  From  this  time 
forward  Christian  took  matters  into  his  own  hands,  and  drew  up  a  new 
Lutheran  order  which  he  imposed  on  the  duchies  ;  four  clergymen  who 
would  not  accept  it  were  deprived,  and  the  Duke's  chaplains  ordained 
others  in  their  places.  At  Flensburg  in  1529,  after  a  disputation 
between  Tast  and  the  Anabaptist  Melchior  Hofmann,  the  doctrines 
of  the  Sacramentaries  and  Anabaptists  were  abjured  ;  and  the  system 
was  complete  when  Bugenhagen  gave  them  a  Lutheran  "  Bishop  "  in 
1541,  and  the  Danish  ritual  came  into  use  in  1542.  In  Denmark 
Christian's  Reforming  tendencies  Avere  the  cause  of  his  never  being 
acknowledged  by  the'  Rigsraad  as  successor  to  the  throne  during  his 
father's  lifetime. 

Frederick  followed  his  son's  lead  by  nominating  Tausen  and  others  as 
his  chaplains,  thus  at  once  exempting  them  from  episcopal  control  and 
giving  them  protection.  The  plan  was  of  course  not  unknown  before, 
but  it  was  so  effective  that  it  caused  the  Bishops  no  little  alarm.     At  the 


612  Frederick  I  and  the  Bishops  [1526-30 

Herredag  of  1526  they  remonstrated  against  any  preacher  being  licensed 
excepting  with  their  consent,  and  "  in  such  Avise  that  he  preach  God's 
Word."  Frederick  was  discreetly  silent  on  the  former  point,  and  answered 
as  to  the  latter  that  he  never  commissioned  them  to  preach  anything  else  ; 
so  the  practice  went  on  unchecked.  Soon  it  produced  its  effect  in  a  wide- 
spread defection,  which  so  alarmed  the  Bishops  that  they  endeavoured  to 
secure  the  presence  in  Denmark  of  Eck  or  Cochlaeus,  or  some  other 
champion  of  orthodoxy,  in  order  that  the  doctrinal  question  might  be 
thoroughly  thrashed  out.  But  this  proved  to  be  impossible,  and  they 
were  thrown  back  on  their  own  resources,  and  resolved  to  fight  it  out  on 
the  constitutional  grounds  with  which  alone  they  were  familiar. 

At  the  Herredag  at  Odense  in  August,  1527,  they  demanded  that  the 
people  should  be  compelled  to  pay  the  tithes  and  other  dues,  which  were 
now  being  refused  on  all  sides.  This  was  granted,  in  return  for  concessions 
to  the  nobles ;  as  was  also  the  claim  that  they  should  be  supported  in  the 
exercise  of  Church  discipline.  But  when  they  went  on  to  protest  against 
the  propagation  of  the  new  doctrines  and  the  protection  of  the  preachers, 
Frederick  replied  that  faith  is  free,  and  that  each  man  must  follow  his 
conscience  ;  that  he  was  lord  of  men's  bodies  and  of  their  goods,  but  not 
of  their  souls ;  and  that  every  man  must  so  fashion  himself  in  religion  as 
he  will  answer  for  it  to  God  at  the  Last  Day.  He  would  no  longer  issue 
letters  of  protection  to  preachers ;  but  if  anyone  molested  those  who  were 
preaching  what  was  godly  and  Christian,  he  would  both  protect  and 
punish.  He  further  suggested  that  the  religious  question  should  be 
decided  by  a  national  assembly  convoked  for  the  purpose  ;  but  this  sug- 
gestion was  at  once  repudiated  by  nobles  and  Bishops  alike.  He  managed 
however  to  estrange  the  nobles  from  the  Bishops  by  supporting  their 
attacks  on  ecclesiastical  property ;  and  thus  the  ecclesiastical  movement 
went  on  vigorously.  In  some  places  the  old  order  was  overturned  alto- 
gether ;  at  Viborg  for  instance  even  the  Cathedral  came  into  the  hands 
of  the  Lutherans  in  1529,  and  at  Copenhagen,  whither  the  King  had 
summoned  Tausen,  they  soon  had  the  upper  hand.  Meanwhile,  the 
Bishops  seemed  incapable  of  taking  the  only  measures  that  could  have 
been  of  any  use.  Preaching  was  almost  in  abeyance  on  their  side  ;  and 
in  many  places  there  were  services  only  two  or  three  times  a  year,  and 
large  numbers  of  country  benefices  were  left  entirely  vacant.  In  1530  for 
instance  the  sixteen  extensive  parishes  of  the  diocese  of  Aarhuus  had  only 
two  priests  between  them. 

In  1530  the  contest  advanced  a  stage  further.  Preparations  were  being 
made  in  Germany  for  the  Diet  of  Augsburg,  which,  it  was  hoped,  would 
put  an  end  to  the  religious  controversy  ;  and  it  seemed  to  the  Bishops  that 
the  same  happy  result  might  be  looked  for  in  Denmark,  if  the  Lutheran 
leaders  could  be  made  to  appear  before  the  King  and  the  magnates. 
Twenty-one  of  them  were  accordingly  cited  to  appear  at  Copenhagen 
before  tlie  Herredag^  the  Bishops  taking  care  also  to  secure  the  help 


1530-3]  Progress  of  the  Reform  613 

of  Paul  Eliaesen  and  of  two  German  theologians,  one  of  whom  was  Dr 
Stagefiihr  of  Cologne.  The  session  was  opened,  and  several  days  were 
spent  in  accusations  against  the  preachers  as  heretics.  When  the  time 
came  for  his  reply,  Tausen  suddenly  produced  a  confession  of  faith  in 
forty-three  articles,  which  he  and  his  fellows  allotted  among  themselves 
and  publicly  defended  day  after  day  before  great  multitudes  of  excited 
people,  in  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

At  first  the  Bishops  only  reminded  the  King  of  his  oath  to  put  down 
heresy ;  but  finding  that  this  had  no  effect  either  upon  him  or  upon  the 
assembly,  they  drew  up  twenty-seven  articles  against  the  preachers  and 
asked  that  their  opponents  might  be  kept  under  restraint  till  the  whole 
matter  was  decided.  Tausen  and  his  followers  replied  with  an  apologia^ 
also  in  twenty-seven  articles,  in  which  they  made  a  violent  attack  upon 
the  whole  Church  system.  But  here  the  matter  ended  ;  the  disputation 
which  had  been  projected  never  took  place  because  of  a  disagreement  as 
to  the  language  in  which  it  was  to  be  held.  The  Bishops  asked  that  it 
should  be  in  Latin,  so  that  their  German  advocates  might  take  part ;  the 
preachers  insisted  upon  Danish,  not  only  as  the  language  best  understood 
by  the  assembly,  but  because  their  whole  appeal  was  to  the  common 
people.  Naturally,  the  popular  voice  was  on  their  side.  There  M^ere 
loud  outcries  in  Copenhagen  against  the  Bishops  and  still  more  against 
the  German  doctors;  and  when  Frederick  dismissed  the  assembly,  enjoin- 
ing peace  upon  both  parties,  there  could  be  no  question  that  the  Bishops 
had  lost  their  case.  They  were  disheartened  in  many  ways :  the  ablest 
of  their  number,  Lage  Urne  of  Roskilde,  was  dead;  Jorgen  Friis  of 
Viborg  had  been  excommunicated,  rather  gratuitously,  by  the  Pope ; 
Beldenak  had  been  deprived  of  his  civil  rights  for  disrespect  to  the  Crown, 
and  soon  afterwards  resigned  ;  and  his  successor  Knud  Gyldenstjerne, 
the  same  who  brought  the  dethroned  Christian  to  Copenhagen,  had  so  far 
thrown  in  his  lot  with  the  Lutheran  movement  as  to  make  Sadolin  a 
kind  of  coadjutor  in  his  diocese,  where  he  translated  Luther's  Shorter 
Catechism  into  Danish  and  issued  it  to  the  clergy  to  be  used  as  a  manual 
of  instruction.  On  all  hands  the  Lutherans  were  gaining  ground.  In 
some  places  there  were  iconoclastic  outbreaks,  though  both  now  and 
throughout  the  period  they  were  surprisingly  few ;  and  to  this  day  many 
of  the  Danish  churches  contain  their  ancient  altar-tables  and  reredoses, 
and  the  clergy  wear  the  old  copes.  But  everywhere  the  Reform  pro- 
gressed, until  Elsinore  was  almost  the  only  stronghold  of  Catholicism. 

At  this  point  however  there  came  a  period  of  disorder,  caused  by  the 
death  of  Frederick  I  at  Gottorp  in  SchlesAvig.  The  effect  of  P'rederick's 
concessions  to  the  nobles  had  been  to  divide  the  country  into  a  series  of 
semi-independent  local  governments  ;  and  nobles.  Bishops,  and  people 
alike  realised  that  they  had  everything  to  gain  or  to  lose  under  the  new 
King.  Under  these  circumstances  conflict  was  inevitable.  No  sooner 
had  the  Estates  come  together  than  the  Bishops  demanded  that  the 


614  The  Counfs  War  [1533-4 

religious  question  should  be  dealt  with.  This  was  distasteful  to  many 
of  the  lay  nobles  ;  bat  in  return  for  concessions  they  gave  way,  and  it 
was  resolved  that  the  old  order  should  be  in  all  respects  upheld,  saving 
for  actual  abuses,  that  the  Mass  should  be  restored  wherever  it  had 
been  abolished,  and  that  nobody  should  preach  without  the  consent  of 
the  Bishop.  Thus  all  the  innovations  introduced  since  the  Herredag 
of  Odense  in  1527  were  swept  away.  The  Estates  next  proceeded  to  the 
election  of  a  successor  to  the  Crown.  The  late  King,  Frederick  I,  had 
left  two  sons,  Christian  of  Schleswig-Holstein  and  his  half-brother  Hans. 
Most  of  the  nobles  favoured  the  former,  whilst  the  Bishops  placed  all 
their  hopes  in  the  latter,  who  was  a  mere  child  and  might  still  be  kept 
from  Lutheranism.  Failing  to  come  to  an  agreement,  they  resolved  to 
postpone  the  election  for  a  year ;  whereupon  Mogens  Gjoe  and  others 
left  Denmark  and  endeavoured  to  persuade  Christian  to  claim  the  crown 
by  force.  This  he  refused  to  do.  But  his  self-restraint  was  of  little  use, 
for  within  a  year  civil  war  had  broken  out.  The  towns,  smarting  under 
the  curtailment  of  their  privileges  at  the  hands  of  the  lay  nobles  and 
of  their  religious  liberties  at  those  of  the  Bishops,  began  to  look  back 
longingly  to  the  days  of  King  Cliristian  II,  and  soon  broke  out  in  revolt. 
The  Burgomasters  of  Copenhagen  and  Malmo,  who  were  at  the  head 
of  the  movement,  made  common  cause  with  the  democracy  of  Llibeck, 
whose  forces  took  the  field  under  Count  Christopher  of  Oldenburg  in 
order  to  place  the  imprisoned  Christian  II  once  more  on  the  throne. 
Such  at  least  was  the  avowed  object  of  the  so-called  Count's  War 
( G-revefeide')  ;  but  behind  these  were  plans  of  another  kind ;  for  the 
people  of  Ltibeck,  under  their  determined  leader  Wullenwever  and  his 
admiral  Meyer,  had  only  thrown  in  their  lot  with  the  Danish  towns  in 
order  to  get  Denmark  into  their  own  hands  and  so  to  restore  the  old 
supremacy  of  the  Hanseatic  League  in  the  north. 

Christopher  directed  his  forces  towards  Sjselland,  and  disembarked 
at  Skovshoved  on  June  23,  1534.  Copenhagen  opened  its  gates  to  him, 
and  Malmo  soon  drove  out  the  garrison  which  had  been  placed  there 
to  overawe  it  ;  and  before  long  the  islands  had  all  overthrown  their 
oppressors,  often  with  great  ferocity,  and  proclaimed  Christian  II. 
Freedom  of  worship  was  at  once  restored.  Bishop  Roennov  of  Roskilde 
was  deprived  and  his  see  given  to  the  aged  Gustaf  Trolle,  formerly  of 
Upsala ;  and  on  Roennov  offering  a  bribe  of  10,000  marks  in  order  to 
retain  possession  of  the  See,  Trolle  was  transferred  to  Fyen,  in  the 
i:>lace  of  Gyldenstjerne,  who  was  likewise  ejected.  From  the  islands 
Christopher  turned  his  attention  to  the  mainland.  One  of  his  lieu- 
tenants was  sent  to  Jutland,  where  the  peasants  quickly  gathered  round 
him.  The  nobles  at  once  marched  against  them,  but  were  routed  in  the 
outskirts  of  Aalborg ;  and  thus  the  greater  part  of  Jutland  once  more 
owned  Christian  IPs  sway.  But  the  turning-point  of  the  war  was 
already  come.     In  the  face  of  so  great  dangers  the  Estates  had  sought 


1534-6]  Successes  of  Christian  III  615 

an  alliance  with  King  Gustavus  of  Sweden,  and  another  with  Duke 
Christian  of  Schleswig-Holstein ;  by  the  terms  of  the  latter,  Christian 
was  to  unite  with  them  against  the  common  enemy,  and  differences  were 
to  be  settled  afterwards.  He  observed  the  terms  loyally;  but  first  the 
nobles  of  Jylland  and  then  those  of  Fyen  elected  him  their  King;  and  at 
length,  in  an  assembly  held  at  Ry,  near  Skanderborg,  the  nobles  and 
Bishops  of  the  mainland  united  in  proclaiming  him. 

Whether  as  ally  or  as  King,  everything  depended  upon  him  and  his 
power.  As  Duke  of  Schleswig  he  made  peace  with  Lubeck,thus  becoming 
free  to  use  his  army  elsewhere.  Then  he  dispatched  his  best  general, 
Hans  Ranzau,  against  the  peasants  of  Jutland,  who  shut  themselves  up 
in  Aalborg.  Ranzau  took  the  town  by  assault,  and  crushed  the  rising 
in  Jutland  by  putting  the  enemy  to  the  sword,  sparing  none  but  women 
and  children.  Thence  he  passed  into  Fyen,  and  inflicted  a  crushing 
defeat  upon  the  main  body  of  Christopher's  army  on  the  hill  of  Oxnebjerg, 
near  Assens,  in  which  Gustaf  Trolle  was  mortally  wounded.  Meanwhile, 
Gustavus  had  invaded  Skaane  and  Jylland,  where  his  mere  presence 
was  enough  to  restore  heart  to  the  nobles,  who  had  only  given  in  their 
allegiance  to  Count  Christopher  through  necessity.  The  Danish  admiral 
Peder  Skram  (^Damnarks  Vove7ials~)  attacked  and  defeated  the  great 
Liibeck  fleet  near  Bornholm,  thus  regaining  command  of  the  sea ;  and 
Ranzau's  army  being  thereupon  transported  to  Sjcclland,  Copenhagen 
was  invested  by  land  and  by  sea.  These  disasters  occasioned  great 
disorders  at  Liibeck:  Wullenwever  and  Meyer  having  in  vain  attempted 
to  retrieve  their  fortunes  by  sending  forth  a  new  commander,  Albert  of 
Mecklenburg,  were  themselves  removed  from  power,  and  Liibeck  made 
its  peace  with  Denmark.  Gradually  all  resistance  died  away:  Malmo 
opened  its  gates  on  April  2,  1536,  Copenhagen  surrendered  at  discretion 
on  July  29,  and  on  August  6  Christian  HI  entered  his  capital  in  triumph. 
Soon  after  the  victory  of  Assens  Norway  had  acknowledged  his  sway. 

The  accession  of  Christian,  as  the  Bishops  well  knew,  meant  their 
downfall;  and  it  was  only  actual  necessity  which  had  compelled  them  to 
accept  him.  Before  the  outbreak  of  the  Count's  War  it  had  seemed 
that  their  cause  might  yet  triumph:  Tausen  himself  had  been  proceeded 
against  and  silenced,  their  own  authority  was  restored,  they  had  even 
reopened  communications  with  Rome,  which  had  been  met,  however, 
with  chilling  reserve.  Now,  all  was  lost.  Christian  HI  was  a  deter- 
mined foe  of  the  old  order  and  had  long  ago  expressed  his  intention  of 
uprooting  it.  Nor  were  they  long  kept  in  suspense.  On  August  11 
Christian  consulted  with  his  commanders,  who  agreed  that  the  Bishops 
should  be  "pinioned."  At  four  o'clock  the  following  morning  three  of 
them  were  brought  as  prisoners  into  the  castle.  Four  hours  afterwards 
the  King  called  together  the  lay  members  of  the  Rigsraad,  and  proposed 
that  the  Bishops  should  be  deprived  of  their  share  in  the  government 
of  the  realm  and  that  their  possessions  should  be  forfeited  to  the  Crown. 


616  Reforms  of  Christian  III  [1536-55 

They  not  only  consented  willingly,  but  also  voted  that  their  spiritual 
power  should  no  longer  be  recognised,  unless  it  should  be  approved  by  a 
general  council  of  the  Danish  Church;  and  the  remaining  Bishops  were 
forthwith  sought  out  and  arrested.  This  vote  of  the  Rigsraad  was 
approved  by  a  national  assembly  (^Rigsdaag  or  Thing')  at  Copenhagen, 
in  which  however  the  nobles  took  the  chief  part,  which  solemnly  declared, 
on  October  30,  1536,  that  they  wished  to  keep  the  holy  Gospel  and  no 
longer  to  have  Bishops,  and  that  the  goods  of  the  Church  ought  to  be 
given  up  to  the  Crown  in  order  to  lighten  the  taxation  of  the  people. 
Thus  fell  the  Danish  Bishops,  as  the  result  partly  of  the  jealousy  roused 
in  the  nobles  by  their  greed  of  temporal  power,  partly  of  the  fanatical 
Lutheranism  of  Christian  III.  They  were  not  badly  treated.  The  Raad 
of  August  12  had  decided  that  they  were  to  be  set  at  liberty  and 
adequately  supported,  on  condition  of  their  promising  to  remain  quiet ; 
Roennov  indeed  continued  in  prison  till  his  death  in  1544,  but  the  rest 
were  set  free,  and  two  of  them,  Gyldenstjerne  and  Ove  Bilde,  ultimately 
conformed  to  the  new  order. 

Christian  now  turned  to  Luther  for  help ;  and  as  the  services  of 
Melanchthon  were  not  obtainable,  Jakob  Bugenhagen,  who  had  already 
organised  the  Reform  in  Pomerania,  was  sent  in  July,  1537,  to  accomplish 
the  same  work  in  Denmark.  He  was  first  called  upon  to  crown  Christian 
and  his  wife,  by  a  usurpation  of  the  ancient  privilege  of  the  Archbishops 
of  Lund.  Then  the  King  nominated  seven  Superintendents,  who  were 
to  take  the  place  of  the  ancient  Bishops,  and  who  soon  became  known  by 
their  name.  On  September  2,  Bugenhagen,  himself  no  more  than  a 
presbyter,  laid  hands  on  them;  and  thus,  by  a  deliberate  innovation,  the 
new  Danish  ministry  was  constituted.  Of  the  persons  chosen  all  were 
Danes,  with  the  unfortunate  exception  of  Wandel,  a  German  who  knew 
no  Danish,  and  who  had  to  be  accompanied  about  his  diocese  by  an 
interpreter.  The  most  important  of  them  was  Peder  Plade  (Palladius), 
who  had  studied  at  Wittenberg,  and  became  Bishop  of  Sjselland,  and 
whose  Visitatsbog  gives  us  the  most  graphic  picture  that  we  possess  of 
the  internal  life  of  the  new  Church.  Tausen  was  so  far  discredited  as 
to  be  for  the  time  overlooked,  though  subsequently,  on  the  death  of 
Wandel,  he  became  Bishop  of  Ribe. 

On  the  same  day  (September  2)  was  published  the  new  Church 
Ordinance  (^Kirkeordinantsen)^  which  had  been  prepared  by  the  Danish 
theologians  and  approved  by  Luther.  It  was  subsequently  sanctioned 
by  the  Assembly  of  Odense  in  1539,  and  became,  with  additions  made  at 
various  later  synods  (1540-55),  the  fundamental  law  of  the  Danish  Church. 
The  Bishops  were  to  have  under  them  a  number  of  provosts  or  deans 
rural;  and  both  alike  were  to  be  chosen  by  delegates  of  the  clergy,  who 
in  turn  were  chosen  by  the  people  or  their  representatives,  saving  the 
riglits  of  the  nobles  in  some  places  ;  all  being  finally  subject  to  the  King's 
approval.     These  provisions,  however,  remained  practically  inoperative, 


1537-59]  Later  history  of  the  Rcf or  Illation  017 

so  far  as  episcopal  elections  were  concerned.  In  each  diocese  there 
were  to  be  two  diocesan  officers  (Stiftslensmcend)  who  administered 
the  confiscated  Church  property  (or  so  much  of  it  as  had  not  fallen 
into  the  hands  of  the  nobles)  in  the  name  o!  the  King,  and  with  the 
Bishops  supervised  the  finances  of  the  churches,  hospitals,  and  schools, 
and  confirmed  the  election  of  the  lower  clergy.  These  latter  continued 
to  hold  their  share  of  the  tithe,  to  which  the  nobles  still  refused  to 
contribute ;  the  episcopal  tithe,  however,  was  confiscated  and  largely 
used  for  good  works.  The  University,  which  had  fallen  into  decay,  was 
greatly  enlarged  ;  ecclesiastical  revenues  were  applied  to  the  support  of 
men  of  merit  and  learning  and  the  plans  of  Christian  II  with  regard  to 
education  were  at  length  carried  out.  A  liturgy  was  compiled,  and  a 
new  translation  of  the  Bible  from  the  original  tongues  was  set  on  foot. 
For  the  rest,  changes  were  made  gradually,  and  there  was  at  first  little 
disorder.  The  Augsburg  Confession  was  ultimately  adopted  with  certain 
modifications,  and  Tausen's  Confession  of  1530  was  dropped  ;  on  the 
other  hand,  the  Formula  of  Concord  was  never  accepted  by  the  Danish 
Church.  The  monastic  houses  and  Cathedral  Chapters  were  not  at  once 
abolished,  though  their  members  were  free  to  depart.  The  Chapter 
of  Roskilde  was  engaged  in  a  formal  disputation  with  Palladius  and 
others  as  late  as  December,  1543 ;  this  and  most  of  the  other  Chapters 
only  ceased  to  exist  as  the  canons  died  out  ;  and  the  convent  of  women 
at  Maribo  was  not  suppressed  till  1621.  Unfortunately,  in  other 
respects  a  very  different  temper  prevailed  as  time  went  on.  In  1551 
Christian  was  compelled  to  issue  an  edict  forbidding  the  nobles  to  treat 
the  children  of  ministers  as  serfs.  The  power  and  influence  of  the 
nobles  were,  however,  considerably  increased  under  his  rule,  the  downfall 
of  clerical  authority  contributing  largely  to  this  result.  The  adherents 
of  the  Roman  communion  were  treated  with  no  little  severity ;  and  the 
Pole  John  Laski,  when  he  left  England  at  the  commencement  of  Queen 
Mary's  reign,  found  that  there  was  no  toleration  in  Denmark  for  such 
heretics  as  himself  and  his  followers.  Nevertheless,  in  spite  of  many 
drawbacks,  the  Reformation  brought  with  it  a  distinct  advance  in 
civilisation  ;  and,  when  Christian  III  died  on  New  Year's  Day,  1559, 
Denmark  was  in  a  more  settled  condition  than  it  had  been  since  the 
days  of  Queen  Margaret,  whilst  trade  and  learning  flourished  as  they 
had  never  done  before. 


II.     THE   REFORMATION   IN   NORWAY   AND   ICELAND 

The  same  thing  could  hardly  be  said  with  regard  to  the  result  of  the 
changes  in  Norway  and  Iceland,  where  the  ecclesiastical  Order  had  been 
much  less  unpopular,  and  probably  less  in  need  of  reform,  tlian  in 
Denmark.     In  fact,  it  cannot  be  said  that  in  either  case  any  popular 


618  Spoliation  of  the  Church  in  Norway        [1523-31 

movement  for  Reformation  existed.  As  regards  Norway,  Frederick  I 
had  made  the  same  promises  to  uphold  the  Church  and  to  put  down 
Lutherans  which  he  had  made  in  Denmark ;  and  his  change  of  opinion 
was  followed  by  the  same  results  in  both  countries.  In  1528  there 
came  to  Bergen  a  Lutheran  preacher  named  Antonius,  who  seems  to 
have  devoted  himself  mainly  to  the  German  residents.  Next  year  he 
was  followed  by  two  others,  Hermann  Fresze  and  Jens  Viborg,  who  bore 
royal  letters  of  protection  similar  to  those  which  had  been  given  to 
Tausen,  and  perhaps  one  or  two  more  in  other  places.  Meanwhile  a 
systematic  spoliation  began  of  the  religious  houses  and  churches  in 
Bergen.  In  1528  the  Nonnesseter  cloister  was  secularised  and  given  over 
as  his  residence  to  Vincent  Lunge,  the  commander  of  the  royal  citadel 
(^Bergenhus).  Soon  afterwards,  the  Dominican  priory  was  destroyed 
by  hre,  apparently  with  the  connivance  of  Lunge  and  the  prior  Jens 
Mortensson,  who  are  said  to  have  divided  the  spoil ;  and  the  chapel  royal 
was  pillaged.  But  these  were  nothing  compared  with  the  outrageous 
f)roceedings  of  Eske  Bilde,  who  replaced  Lunge  in  1529,  and  became 
known  as  the  Kirkehryder.,  from  his  activitj^  in  destroying  churches. 
About  the  citadel  of  Bergen  stood  a  group  of  the  richest  and  most 
venerable  churches  in  Norway,  together  with  the  palace  of  the  Arch- 
bishops of  Trondhjem  and  the  canons'  houses.  On  the  pretext  (for  it 
seems  to  have  been  no  more)  that  they  interfered  with  the  effective 
character  of  the  fortress,  Frederick  ordered  an  attack  to  be  made  on 
these.  One  by  one  they  were  destroyed,  and  their  treasures  removed  to 
Denmark ;  and  at  length,  in  May,  1531,  the  ancient  cathedral  itself  was 
demolished.  This  was  done  in  pursuance  of  a  bargain  made  some  three 
months  before  with  the  Bishop  of  Bergen,  Olaf  Thorkildsson,  by  which 
he  was  to  receive  in  exchange  for  his  palace  and  cathedral  the  great 
monastery  of  Munkeliv,  formerly  Benedictine,  now  Brigittine,  on  the 
further  side  of  the  harbour.  These  proceedings  naturally  gave  courage 
to  the  disaffected  ;  the  Lutherans  now  seized  upon  the  Church  of 
St  Cross  (^Kors  Kirhe')^  whilst  the  German  merchants  intruded  their 
minister  Antonius  in  the  Church  of  St  Halvard,  and  another  in  the 
Maria  Kirke. 

Whether  Archbishop  Olaf  Engelbrektsson  of  Trondhjem  would  have 
been  able  to  do  anything  to  stay  the  hand  of  the  destroyer  is  perhaps 
doubtful,  for  his  own  diocese  was  not  a  little  troubled  by  the  same 
kind  of  thing  ;  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  was  only  when  the  work  was 
complete  that  his  suffragan  of  Bergen  told  him  what  was  being  done. 
Archbishop  Olaf  was  already  none  too  well  disposed  towards  King 
Frederick.  In  1523,  whilst  on  his  way  to  Rome  to  be  consecrated,  he 
had  gone  to  Malines,  where  the  exiled  Christian  II  (who  might  still  have 
claimed  to  be  the  legal  King  of  Norway)  then  resided,  and  had  sworn 
allegiance  to  him.  On  his  way  home  the  Archbishop  had  visited 
Copenhagen,  and  had  done  homage  to  Frederick  I ;  nor  does  he  seem 


1531-5]  Disputed  succession  619 

to  have  flinched  from  his  allegiance.  But  the  spoliations  in  Norway 
now  made  him  feel  that  the  Church  would  be  safer  under  Christian,  or 
at  any  rate  that  they  could  get  on  better  without  Frederick.  He  was 
by  no  means  the  only  man  in  Norway  who  held  this  view ;  and  Christian 
himself  was  at  this  very  time  seeking  an  opportunity  of  invading  Norway. 
Before  long  it  came.  The  Bishops  and  the  Danish  nobles  in  Norway 
were  summoned  to  a  Herredag  to  meet  in  Copenhagen  in  June,  1531  ;  the 
Archbishop,  being  provided  with  a  good  excuse  in  a  greatfirewliich  devas- 
tated Trondhjem  and  almost  destroyed  the  cathedral,  remained  behind. 
On  November  5  Christian  reached  the  Norwegian  coast  with  a  fleet  of 
twenty-five  ships  and  a  considerable  army,  and  the  next  day  he  issued 
a  proclamation  to  the  people  of  Norway  in  which  he  put  himself  forward 
as  their  deliverer,  and  summoned  them  to  gather  round  him  at  Oslo. 
The  Archbishop  accepted  and  proclaimed  him,  as  did  the  Bishops,  but 
in  a  somewhat  lukewarm  fashion  ;  and  Christian  dissipated  his  energies 
and  wasted  his  opportunity  to  such  an  extent  that  the  following  year  he 
was  compelled  to  make  overtures  to  his  uncle,  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
ended  in  his  imprisonment.  Frederick  was  far  too  wise  to  push  matters 
to  an  extremity,  and  the  Bishops  were  glad  to  purchase  their  safety  by 
paying  him  fines  ;  but  two  monasteries  which  had  given  help  to  Christian 
were  secularised,  and  Knud  Gyldenstjerne  carried  off  no  small  amount  of 
Church  plunder  to  Denmark. 

The  death  of  Frederick  I  and  the  wars  which  followed  once  more 
plunged  Norw-ay  into  disorder.  The  Archbishop  was  at  the  head  of  the 
Norwegian  Council,  and  had  he  only  known  his  own  mind,  it  is  possible 
that  he  might  have  chosen  his  own  King,  or  even  secured  the  independence 
of  Norway.  But  he  hesitated  until  Duke  Christian  had  won  his  first 
victories,  and  then  it  was  too  late.  In  May,  1535,  the  Bishops  of 
Oslo  and  Hamar,  together  with  the  chief  nobles  of  the  south,  signed  a 
manifesto  by  which  they  accepted  Christian  III  as  King,  provided  that 
he  would  promise  to  be  faithful  to  the  ancient  laws  of  Norway ;  and 
they  sent  this  to  the  Archbishop  and  the  northern  lords  for  their 
signature.  By  this  time  Olaf  was  beginning  to  recognise  the  fact  that 
anything  was  better  than  a  Lutheran  King  ;  and  just  then  he  received  a 
letter  from  the  Emperor  urging  him  to  support  the  claims  of  Frederick, 
the  Count  Palatine,  who  was  about  to  marry  the  daughter  of  the 
imprisoned  Christian  II.  He  therefore  temporised  in  the  hope  that 
matters  might  settle  themselves.  Soon,  however,  there  came  two 
emissaries  of  Duke  Christian  to  Norway  with  instructions  to  press 
forward  his  cause,  whereupon  the  members  of  his  party  decided  to  go 
northwards  to  Trondhjem.  They  arrived  towards  the  end  of  December, 
1535,  and  a  Council  was  at  once  summoned,  at  whicli  were  present  the 
Bishops,  the  chief  Danish  nobles  in  Norway,  and  a  considerable  number 
of  the  bonder  of  the  northern  provinces.  Vincent  Lunge,  the  chief 
adherent  of  Duke  Christian,  at  once  demanded  that  he  should  be  elected 


620  CliTistian  III  and  the  Reformation         [1537-45 

King,  and  that  Norway  should  forthwith  pay  slzat  to  him.  To  this  it 
was  answered,  reasonably  enough,  that  no  election  could  be  complete 
until  the  person  chosen  should  have  promised  to  observe  the  laws  and 
customs  of  Norway,  and  that  not  till  then  was  skat  due.  The  bonder 
now  withdrew  and  held  a  hasty  consultation  with  the  Archbishop, 
from  which,  probably  roused  by  his  words,  they  rushed  in  fury  to  the 
house  of  Vincent  Lunge  and  slew  him.  Some  of  the  other  leaders  barely 
escaped  with  their  lives,  and  these  were  at  once  arrested  and  imprisoned 
by  Olaf .  There  followed  a  short  and  ill-judged  attempt  on  the  part  of 
Olaf  to  get  the  upper  hand  in  Norway ;  but  his  party  was  less  strong 
than  he  had  supposed,  and  before  long  practically  the  whole  land  was 
subject  to  Christian,  and  Olaf  was  seeking  terms.  Presently  losing  all 
hope,  the  Archbishop  collected  all  the  treasure  upon  which  he  could  lay 
his  hands,  together  with  the  archives  of  the  kingdom,  and  set  sail  for 
the  Netherlands  on  April  1, 1537.  He  died  at  Lierre,  in  Brabant,  on 
March  7  of  the  following  year. 

His  departure  left  the  way  open  for  Christian  III,  who  almost 
immediately  took  possession.  He  had  already  taken  steps  both  to 
avenge  himself  and  to  put  an  end  to  what  had  long  been  a  serious 
danger  to  his  realm.  By  the  third  article  of  his  "  capitulation,"  made 
in  the  Rigsdaag  at  Copenhagen  in  October,  1536,  he  vowed  that  the 
kingdom  of  Norway  should  "  hereafter  be  and  remain  under  the  Crown 
of  Denmark,  and  not  hereafter  be  or  be  called  a  separate  kingdom, 
but  a  dependency  of  the  kingdom  of  Denmark."  Thus  Norway  lost 
its  ancient  liberties  at  a  stroke.  After  this,  although  the  "  Recess  " 
on  religion  which  had  been  put  forth  at  the  same  time  (ratifying  the 
changes  which  had  already  been  made)  said  nothing  of  Norway,  it  was 
inevitable  that  the  Norwegian  Church  should  fall  after  the  example  of  her 
sister  of  Denmark.  One  by  one  the  Bishops  were  turned  out,  with  two 
exceptions.  Hans  Reif,  the  BisRop  of  Oslo,  a  man  of  easy  convictions, 
soon  succeeded  in  convincing  the  King  of  his  conversion  to  Lutheranism, 
and  was  reinstated  in  charge  not  only  of  Oslo,  but  of  Hamar,  where  he 
remained  till  his  death  in  1545.  Gebel  Pedersson,  the  Bishop  elect  of 
Bergen,  a  man  of  far  nobler  character,  had  become  a  convinced  Lutheran  : 
in  1537  he  went  to  Denmark,  where  Bugenhagen  laid  hands  on  him,  and 
returned  to  take  charge  as  Bishop  of  Bergen  and  Stavanger.  For  the 
rest,  little  or  none  of  the  care  which  was  taken  in  Denmark  to  supply 
teachers,  preachers,  and  schools,  was  extended  to  Norwa3^  The  under- 
manning  of  the  Bishoprics  was  typical  of  what  went  on  elsewhere. 
In  large  numbers  of  country  places  the  old  clergy  were  left  till  they 
died ;  at  their  death  their  places  were  left  unoccupied.  The  few 
Lutheran  pastors  who  were  sent  to  Norway  were  unacquainted  with 
the  ancient  Norse  language,  which  w^as  still,  to  a  large  extent,  used  in 
country  places.  Their  attempts  to  obtain  possession  of  the  tithes  led 
to  frequent  disputes  which  often  ended  in  bloodshed ;  and  on  the  whole 


1518-54]      The  Reformation  in  Iceland  and  Sweden         621 

the  Reformation  caused  as  much  harm  to  the  social  condition  of  the 
people  in  Norway,  for  half  a  century  at  any  rate,  as  it  did  good  in  Denmark. 

In  Iceland  things  were  even  worse.  At  first,  indeed,  there  seemed 
to  be  hope  of  a  conservative  reformation  ;  for  Bishop  Gisser  Einarsen 
of  Skalholt,  who  had  been  educated  in  Germany,  began  making  changes 
on  the  lines  of  those  in  Denmark,  though  without  overturning  the 
ancient  ministry  ;  and  an  Icelandic  version  of  the  New  Testament,  printed 
in  1540,  found  plenty  of  readers.  But  when  a  formal  attempt  was 
made  to  introduce  the  Danish  ecclesiastical  system,  there  came  a  violent 
reaction.  In  1548  Bishop  Jon  Aresen,  of  Holum,  and  Oi^gmund,  tlie 
ex-Bishop  of  Skalholt,  placed  themselves  at  the  head  of  what  rapidly 
grew  into  a  revolt  against  the  Danish  power.  And  although  the  former 
was  taken  prisoner  in  1551  by  David  Gudmundarsen,  and  executed  as 
a  traitor,  together  with  his  two  sons,  his  followers  long  strove  to  avenge 
his  death.  It  was  not  till  1554  that  they  were  put  down,  and  the 
Reformation  imposed  by  force  on  Iceland. 


III.     THE  KEFORMATION  IN   SWEDEN 

"We  now  return  to  trace  the  fortunes  of  Sweden,  where,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  massacre  of  Stockholm  had  decided  the  fate  of  the  Danish  rule. 
But  if  the  Swedish  War  of  Independence  was  already  inevitable,  in  its 
actual  course  it  was  the  work  of  one  man,  the  young  Gustaf  Eriksson, 
known  to  later  ages  as  Gustavus  Vasa  from  the  fascine  or  sheaf  {vasa) 
which  was  the  badge  of  the  family.  Born  in  1496  at  Lindholm,  he  had 
studied  from  1509  to  1514  at  Upsala,  after  which  he  entered  the  service  of 
the  younger  Sten  Sture  and  fought  under  him  against  the  Danes.  Given 
as  a  hostage  to  Christian  II  in  1518  and  carried  away  treacherously  to 
Denmark,  he  had  broken  his  parole  in  September  of  the  following  year 
and  made  his  way  to  Liibeck,  whence  after  some  months  he  was  allowed 
to  proceed  to  Sweden,  and  landed  near  Kalmar  on  May  31,  1519.  lie 
spent  the  summer  as  a  fugitive  in  the  south,  till  the  news  of  the  massacre 
reached  him  and  he  fled  to  his  own  remote  province  of  Dalecarlia.  Here, 
after  enduring  many  hardships  and  having  many  narrow  escapes,  he  found 
himself  early  in  1521  at  the  head  of  a  sufficient  force  of  dalesmen  to 
raise  the  standard  of  revolt.  From  this  time  forward  it  was  never 
lowered  until  the  whole  country  was  in  liis  hands  and  the  Danes  had 
been  driven  out.  The  first  success  of  the  insurgents  was  the  capture  of 
the  town,  though  not  of  the  citadel,  of  Vesteriis.  Upsala  fell  not  long 
afterwards,  and  within  little  more  than  a  year  most  of  the  Danish 
garrisons  had  been  invested.  Thanks  to  the  undisciplined  character  of 
his  troops  two  attacks  upon  Stockholm  failed  ;  and  the  same  thing 
occurred  elsewhere.     But  Christian's  own  throne  was  insecure  ;  and  wiien 


622  Gustavus  Vasa  in  Sweden  [1522-3 

once  the  power  of  Denmark  was  divided  it  could  only  be  a  question  of 
time.  On  June  20,  1523,  Gustavus  entered  Stockholm,  and  by  July  7 
the  last  Danish  garrison  in  Sweden,  that  of  Kalmar,  had  capitulated. 
Meanwhile  Gustavus  was  no  longer  merely  the  leader  of  a  band  of 
insurgents.  On  July  14, 1522,  he  was  able  to  issue  a  proclamation  as  the 
recognised  commander  of  five  provinces.  An  assembly  at  Vadstena  on 
August  24  is  said  to  have  offered  him  the  crown,  which  he  refused, 
accepting  however  the  office  of  Administrator,  and  adding  that  it  would 
be  time  enough  to  choose  a  King  when  they  had  driven  the  foe  out  of 
the  land.  A  general  diet,  so-called,  met  at  Strengnas  on  May  27,  1523. 
It  is  not  clear  whether  the  few  magnates  who  still  survived  were  sum- 
moned, but  the  diet  nominated  a  new  Biksrdd,  and  then,  on  June  7, 
proceeded  to  elect  Gustavus  as  King  of  Sweden. 

The  new  King's  position  was  no  easy  one.  Although  he  had  been 
duly  elected  he  had  little  power  ;  the  peasants  who  were  his  strongest 
supporters  were  impatient  of  control,  and  the  older  nobles  looked  on 
him  with  jealousy,  and  almost  with  contempt.  Sweden  was  so  devastated 
by  the  war  as  to  be  practically  bankrupt ;  the  fields  lay  fallow,  the  mines 
were  un worked,  and  many  of  the  cities,  Stockholm  in  particular,  were 
desolated.  The  Swedish  possessions  in  Finland  were  still  in  the  enemy's 
hands  ;  and  the  only  ally  of  the  Swedes,  the  city  of  Llibeck,  had  helped 
them  in  pursuance  of  its  own  schemes  of  aggrandisement,  and  was  now 
claiming  large  sums  of  money  in  return  for  advances  made  and  aid  given 
during  the  course  of  the  struggle.  To  appease  them,  the  diet  of 
Strengnas  had  granted  to  Liibeck,  Danzig,  and  their  allies  a  monopoly  of 
Swedishcommerce;  but  ambassadors  still  followed  Gustavus  wherever  he 
Avent,  and  urged  the  speedy  payment  of  the  account.  To  eke  out  the 
scarcity  of  money,  Gustavus,  like  most  of  the  kings  of  his  day  and  to 
an  even  greater  extent,  had  adopted  the  plan  of  debasing  the  coinage  ; 
but  the  effect  was  to  inspire  distrust,  and  before  long  he  was  compelled 
to  circulate  his  klippings  at  a  greatly  depreciated  rate. 

He  was  at  the  end  of  his  resources,  and  the  only  remedy  seemed  to 
be  to  turn  to  the  Church,  which  was  still  as  wealthy  as  ever.  The 
Bishops  as  a  whole  were  not  unfriendly.  Johan  Brask,  Bishop  of 
Linkoeping,  an  astute  and  far-seeing  patriot,  had  early  thrown  in  his  lot 
on  the  winning  side  with  Gustavus  ;  the  Danish  Bishops  of  Strengnas 
and  Skara  had  been  replaced  by  Bishops  elect  who  were  favourable  to 
him,  and  the  vacant  sees  of  Vesteras,  Abo,  and  Upsala  (from  the  last- 
named  of  which  Gustaf  Trolle  had  fled)  were  likely  to  be  filled  in  the 
same  way.  Moreover,  Gustavus  himself  was  just  then  in  good  odour  in 
Rome.  He  had  indeed  been  accused  of  heresy  by  Christian  II  in  1521  ; 
and  his  sojourn  at  and  alliance  with  Liibeck  lent  colour  to  the  charge. 
But  his  cause  found  a  staunch  defender  in  the  famous  Joannes  Magni 
(Johan  Magnusson),  a  Swedish  scholar  and  canon  of  Linkoeping  who  had 
lived  away  from  his  country  for  seventeen  years  without  losing  any  of 


1522-4]         Demands  of  money  from  the  Church  623 

his  interest  in  its  affairs.  He  had  studied  at  Louvain  under  Adrian  of 
Utrecht,  a  man  very  likeminded  with  himself  ;  and  in  1522  his  old 
master,  now  Pope  Adrian  VI,  sent  him  as  Legate  to  Sweden.  He 
arrived  whilst  the  Diet  of  Strengnas  was  in  session,  was  warmly  welcomed, 
and  in  turn  spoke  very  warmly  with  regard  to  Gustavus,  and  seemed  to 
look  favourably  on  his  plans  for  restoring  efificiency  to  the  Church.  So 
much  pleased  with  him  was  the  new  Iliksrdd  that  it  addressed  a  letter 
to  the  Pope  begging  that  he  and  the  Bishops  might  be  empowered  to  set 
to  work  at  once.  To  this  request  no  answer  was  ever  made,  but  soon 
afterwards  the  Canons  of  Upsala  chose  Joannes  to  be  their  Archbishop. 

Under  these  circumstixnces  Gustavus,  after  having  already  in  1522 
claimed  an  aid  from  the  clergy,  made  in  1523  an  urgent  demand  for 
money  upon  Bishop  Brask,  and  issued  a  proclamation  calling  upon  all  the 
monasteries  and  churches  to  send  him,  as  a  loan,  such  church  vessels  and 
such  money  as  could  be  spared,  the  amount  which  each  diocese  or  monas- 
tery was  expected  to  provide  being  stated  in  a  schedule.  The  result  was 
not  satisfactory.  The  demands  of  the  Liibeck  ambassadors  were  indeed 
met,  but  the  forced  loan  caused  no  little  irritation  in  Sweden,  and  gave 
mortal  offence  at  Rome.  A  letter  fromAdrian  VI  was  presently  received, 
saying  nothing  about  the  confirmation  of  the  Bishops  elect  for  which 
Gustavus  had  asked,  and  insisting  on  the  restoration  of  Archbishop  Trolle. 
The  King  wrote  back  in  no  measured  terms,  refusing  to  restore  him  ; 
and  in  November  2,  1523,  in  demanding  confirmation  for  the  Bisliop 
elect  of  Abo,  he  threatened  that  if  it  was  refused  they  would  do  without 
it,  and  that  he  himself  would  carry  out  the  reformation  of  the  Church. 
"  Let  not  your  Holiness  imagine,"  he  concludes,  "  that  we  shall  allow 
foreigners  to  rule  the  Church  in  Sweden."  These  were  plain  words, 
and  they  appear  to  have  had  some  effect.  Early  in  1524  the  new  Pope 
granted  confirmation  to  Peter  Magnusson,  the  Legate's  brother.  Bishop 
elect  of  Vesteras  (in  place  of  the  former  elect  Peter  Jakobsson  or 
Sunnenvseder,  removed  for  disloyalty)  ;  and  thus  on  Rogation  Day 
there  was  consecrated,  in  Rome,  the  Bishop  from  whom  the  whole  of 
the  later  Swedish  episcopate  derived  its  succession. 

Meanwhile  Gustavus'  position  was  not  growing  easier.  Soon  after 
his  accession  a  war  for  the  recovery  of  Finland  had  greatly  taxed  his 
resources.  This  was  followed  by  an  expedition  against  the  "  robbers' 
stronghold"  of  Soren  Norby  in  the  island  of  Gottland,  which  was 
rendered  difficult  by  the  ill-concealed  jealousy  of  Denmark  and  Liibeck, 
and  became  a  positive  danger  when  Bernhard  von  Mehlen,  the  German 
knight  to  whom  Gustavus  had  given  the  command  of  the  expedition, 
turned  traitor  and  endeavoured  by  means  of  it  to  reconquer  Sweden  for 
Christian  II.  Nor  were  things  better  at  home.  The  further  demand 
for  money  which  he  was  forced  to  make  upon  clergy  and  people  alike 
gave  rise  to  serious  discontent.  When  Peter  Sunnenvccder  was  removed 
from  Vesteras  for  disaffection,  as  has  been  mentioned  above,  he  fled  to 


624  Reformers  in  Sweden  [1519-27 

Dalecarlia,  together  with  Knud,  the  Provost  of  Vesteras,  at  one  time 
Archbishop  elect  of  Upsala,  who  had  also  been  turned  out,  and  there 
they  raised  the  standard  of  revolt.  One  plot  followed  another,  now  on 
behalf  of  Christian  II,  now  on  behalf  of  one  of  the  Stures,  and  again, 
early  in  1527,  on  behalf  of  a  pretender  to  their  name.  Gustavus  found 
no  great  difficulty  in  suppressing  them,  and  generally  took  severe  meas- 
ures of  reprisal  ;  but  he  could  not  prevent  their  recurrence.  An  entire 
readjustment  of  burdens,  as  between  the  clergy,  the  nobles,  and  the 
people  at  large,  was  plainly  needed  ;  and  when  the  King  convoked 
the  general  Diet  of  Vesteras  to  meet  in  June,  1527,  it  was  with  the 
deliberate  intention  of  taking  action  in  the  matter. 

But  it  was  no  longer  merely  or  chiefly  a  question  of  money  ;  during 
the  last  few  years  Lutheranism  had  made  great  strides  in  Sweden,  and 
the  whole  status  of  the  Swedish  Church  was  now  at  issue.  The  first 
preachers  of  the  new  opinions  were  Olaus  and  Laurentius  Petri  (Olaf 
and  Lars  Petersson,  b.  1497  and  1499),  the  sons  of  a  blacksmith  at 
Orebro,  who  had  sent  them  to  study  at  Wittenberg  with  no  idea  of  the 
consequences  which  were  likely  to  follow.  On  their  return  to  Sweden 
in  1519,  Olaus  went  to  Strengniis,  where,  as  master  of  the  Chapter 
school,  he  soon  acquired  a  great  influence  over  the  Archdeacon,  Lauren- 
tius Andreae  (Lars  Andersson,  1482-1552).  For  a  time  his  teaching 
aroused  no  suspicion,  and  his  sermons  preached  at  the  diet  of  Strengnas 
made  a  great  impression  ;  but  he  had  already  roused  the  suspicions  of 
Bishop  Brask,  who  accused  him  of  heresy  in  a  letter  dated  May  7,  1523, 
and  from  this  time  forward  was  constantly  urging  Gustavus  to  take 
action  against  him.  At  first  the  King  seemed  to  agree,  though  he  urged 
that  persuasion  was  a  better  remedy  than  force.  But  the  inducements 
to  take  the  other  side  were  very  strong  ;  and  before  long,  partly  from 
interest  and  partly  from  conviction,  he  had  decided  to  give  his  support 
to  the  new  preachers,  still  protesting  however  that  he  desired  to  reform 
and  not  to  overthrow  the  Church. 

In  the  summer  of  1524  he  summoned  Olaus  Petri  to  Stockholm  as 
city  clerk,  sent  his  brother  to  Upsala  as  professor  of  theology,  and 
made  Laurentius  Andreae,  already  his  Chancellor,  Archdeacon  of 
Upsala.  The  advancing  wave  was  checked  for  a  moment  in  the 
autumn,  when  the  iconoclastic  excesses  brought  about  at  Stockholm 
by  two  Dutch  Anabaptists,  Knipperdolling  and  Melchior  Rink,  caused 
a  reaction  of  popular  feeling  and  drew  from  Gustavus  a  stern  con- 
demnation. At  Christmas,  however,  a  discussion  held  in  the  royal 
palace  between  Olaus  Petri  and  Peter  Galle,  a  champion  of  the  old 
order,  on  the  subject  of  the  sufficiency  of  Scripture,  once  more  gave 
them  confidence  ;  and  in  February,  1525,  Olaus  publicly  set  the  rules  of 
the  Church  at  defiance  by  marrying  a  wife.  A  few  months  afterwards 
Gustavus  directed  Archbishop  Magni  to  set  on  foot  the  translation  of 
the  Bible  into  Swedish.     The  work  was  actually  planned  out  and  the 


1526-7]  Gustaviis  and  the  Diet  625 


books  allotted  to  different  translators ;  but,  apparently  owing  to  the 
opposition  of  Brask,  it  was  never  carried  out ;  and  the  viicant  place  was 
in  part  filled  by  a  version  of  the  New  Testament,  mainly  the  work  of 
Andreae,  which  appeared  in  1526,  followed  subsequently,  in  1540-1,  by 
a  much  better  translation  of  the  whole  Bible,  which  was  edited  and 
largely  made  by  Laurentius  Petri.  In  the  same  year  (1526)  Gustavus 
sent  a  series  of  doctrinal  articles  to  the  prelates,  intending  to  use  their 
replies  as  the  basis  for  a  second  and  more  exhaustive  theological  disputa- 
tion ;  and  although  this  plan  fell  througli  owing  to  the  natural  reluc- 
tance of  some  of  the  persons  concerned  to  submit  their  faith  to  the 
tribunal  of  popular  opinion,  the  answers  of  Peter  Galle  were  published, 
with  disparaging  comments  by  Olaus  Petri. 

While  thus  undermining  the  claims  of  ecclesiastical  authority,  the 
King  was  also  making  insidious  attacks  upon  the  property  of  the  Church. 
He  systematically  billeted  his  troops  upon  the  monasteries  ;  he  left  no 
means  untried  to  get  a  hold  upon  their  internal  affairs ;  he  sought  out 
legal  pretexts  for  reclaiming  lands  given  to  them  by  his  ancestors. 
The  property  of  the  Bishops  suffered  in  like  manner,  and  especially  that 
of  the  richest  of  them,  the  aged  Brask,  whom  the  King  seems  to  have 
despoiled  with  special  malice  or  policy.  Archbishop  Joannes  Magni 
suffered  even  worse  things.  Injudicious  letters  which  he  liad  written  to 
ecclesiastics  abroad  subjected  him  to  a  charge  of  conspiracy,  on  which  he 
was  arrested  and  imprisoned.  The  King  allowed  him  to  leave  Sweden 
in  the  autumn  of  1526,  ostensibly  on  an  embassy  to  Poland;  but  it  was 
really  a  banishment,  from  which  he  never  returned.  He  took  up  his 
abode  at  Danzig  and  was  soon  afterwards  confirmed  by  the  Pope  and 
consecrated  with  the  barren  title  of  Archbishop  of  Upsala.  And  thus 
at  length  the  way  was  prepared  for  further  encroachment.  By  the  terms 
of  the  summons,  the  Diet  of  Vesteras  was  to  discuss  questions  of  faith, 
and  especially  the  relations  between  Sweden  and  the  Papacy. 

The  Diet  met  on  June  24,  1527.  There  were  present  four  Bishops, 
four  canons,  fifteen  lay  members  of  the  Riksrad,  one  hundred  and  twenty- 
nine  nobles,  thirty-two  burgesses,  fourteen  deputies  of  the  miners,  and 
one  hundred  and  four  of  the  peasants.  For  the  first  time  in  Swedish 
history  the  Bishops  were  degraded  from  their  place  of  honour  next  the 
King  and  were  ranked  below  the  senators.  Smarting  under  the  affront, 
they  held  a  secret  meeting  before  the  session  of  the  following  day,  at 
which,  instigated  by  Brask,  they  signed  a  set  of  protests,  a  copy  of  which 
was  found  fifteen  years  afterwards  under  the  floor  of  the  cathedral, 
against  anything  that  might  be  done  in  the  direction  of  Lutheranism  or 
contrary  to  the  authority  of  the  Pope.  When  the  Diet  again  met  the 
Chancellor  arose  in  Gustavus'  name,  reviewed  tlie  events  of  his  reign, 
and  urged  the  necessity  for  a  larger  revenue,  plainly  pointing  to  the 
ecclesiastical  property  as  the  only  source  from  which  it  might  be 
obtained.     Brask  replied  on  behalf  of  the  Bishops,  saying  that  they 

.^      M.    TT      II.  40 


626  The  Recess  of  Vesterds  [1527 

could  not  help  the  state  of  the  kingdom ;  that  they  would  do  all  in 
their  power  to  put  down  abuses,  but  that,  being  directed  by  the  Pope 
to  defend  their  property,  they  could  not  do  otherwise.  This  brought 
Gustavus  himself  to  his  feet.  He  enquired  whether  the  members  of 
the  Diet  considered  this  a  fair  answer.  Thure  Jonsson,  the  oldest 
amongst  them,  replied  that  it  was.  "  Then,"  said  Gustavus,  "  I  will  no 
longer  be  your  King,  and  if  you  can  find  one  who  will  please  you  better 
I  shall  be  glad.  Pay  me  for  my  property  in  the  kingdom,  and  return 
what  I  have  expended  in  your  service ;  and  then  I  solemnly  protest 
that  I  will  never  return  to  this  degenerate  and  thankless  native  land  of 
mine."  With  this  outburst  he  strode  from  the  hall  and  left  them 
to  discuss  at  their  leisure.  He  knew  what  the  result  must  be  ;  he 
had  made  Sweden,  and  it  could  not  do  without  him.  They  had  all 
the  power  in  their  hands,  whilst  his  only  asset  was  his  own  person- 
ality. But  it  was  enough ;  and  after  three  days  the  members  of  the 
Diet  sent  to  say  that  they  would  conform  to  his  wishes  in  all 
things. 

Gustavus  was  now  master.  The  Orders,  with  the  exception  of  the 
clergy,  made  their  proposals  for  dealing  with  the  crisis.  Contrary  to  all 
precedent,  these  proposals  were  formulated  by  the  Riksrdd  instead  of 
being  voted  on  by  the  whole  Diet ;  but  the  resulting  decree,  the  famous 
Vesteras  Recess,  was  nevertheless  put  forth  in  its  name.  It  provided 
that  all  episcopal,  capitular,  and  monastic  property  which  was  not 
absolutely  required  (and  of  this  he  was  the  judge)  was  to  be  handed 
over  to  the  King ;  all  the  lands  exempt  from  taxes  (^Frdlsejord^  which 
had  been  given  to  the  Church  since  1454  were  to  revert  to  the  original 
owners  ;  taxable  land  (^SkattejorcT)  was  to  be  given  up  however  long  it 
had  been  alienated.  Preachers  were  to  set  forth  the  pure  Word  of  God 
and  nothing  else,  whilst  on  the  religious  question  in  general  a  disputa- 
tion was  to  be  held  in  the  presence  of  the  Diet,  and  a  settlement  to  be 
made  on  it  as  a  basis.  The  disputation,  if  held  at  all,  was  naturally 
of  no  importance ;  and  the  Diet  proceeded,  on  June  24,  to  pass  the 
Vesterds  Ordinantie,  consisting  of  twenty-two  regulations  on  the  subject 
of  religion.  By  these,  detailed  provision  was  made  for  the  confiscation 
of  the  bulk  of  the  Church  property,  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the 
Recess.  No  dignitaries  were  to  be  appointed  until  their  names  had 
been  approved  by  the  King ;  parish  clergy  were  to  be  appointed  by  the 
Bishops,  subject  to  removal  by  the  King  in  case  of  unfitness ;  small 
parishes  might  be  united  where  it  was  desirable,  the  Gospel  was  to  be 
taught  in  every  school,  compulsory  confession  was  abolished,  monks  were 
not  to  be  absent  from  their  monasteries  without  licence  from  the  civil 
authority,  and  so  forth.  The  result  of  these  Ordinances  was  to  give  the 
King  all  the  power  that  he  could  wisli  for  over  the  Church.  Dispirited 
and  almost  heartbroken,  the  aged  Brask  before  long  obtained  permission 
to  visit  the  island  of  Gottland,  which  was  part  of  his  diocese,  crossed 


1527-60]  Supremacy  and polic}j  of  Gustavus  627 

the    Baltic,  and   joined  Archbishop  Magni   at  Danzig.     None  of   his 
brethren  dared  to  oppose  Gustavus'  will. 

Nor  was  it  only  the  ecclesiastical  order  that  suffered.  In  Sweden, 
unlike  Denmark,  none  but  the  King  gained  power  through  the 
Reformation.  The  Riksrad,  once  all-important,  was  now  nothing  more 
than  a  complaisant  royal  Council.  As  leader  of  a  popular  movement, 
Gustavus  had  triumphed  over  the  nobles,  who  were  now  glad  to  make 
common  cause  with  the  peasants  wherever  they  %vere  aggrieved.  It 
should  however  be  noted  that  one  of  the  Vesteriis  Ordinances  gave  the 
nobles  the  right  to  recover  all  their  property  which  had  been  acquired 
by  the  churches  and  convents  since  the  redaction  of  the  year  1454,  an 
important  concession.  There  were  revolts  from  time  to  time,  generally 
directed  in  part  at  any  rate  against  the  new  ecclesiastical  order,  as  for 
instance  in  West  Gothland  in  1529  under  Thure  Jonsson,  and  again  on 
a  larger  scale  in  1542  under  Nels  Dacke.  But  they  were  in  general 
easily  put  down,  and  always  left  Gustavus'  power  stronger  than  before. 
Nor  was  this  all.  The  inevitable  result  of  the  changes  which  were  being 
made  was  to  put  into  abeyance  rights  which  formerly  belonged  to  one 
class  or  another  of  the  community.  These  were  by  degrees  seized  upon 
by  Gustavus  as  a  kind  of  extension  of  his  prerogative  royal  ;  and  before 
long  he  was  exercising  without  opposition  an  authority  which  no  previous 
King  of  Sweden  had  ever  possessed.  In  a  Council  held  at  Orebro  early 
in  1540,  the  chief  nobles  were  made  to  take  an  oath  acknowledging 
Gustavus'  sons,  Johan  and  Erik,  as  the  legitimate  heirs  to  the  kingdom  ; 
and  the  Act  of  Hereditary  Settlement,  passed  on  January  13,  1544, 
formally  recognised  hereditary  succession  in  the  male  line  as  the  rule  of 
the  Swedish  constitution.  Meanwhile  the  kingdom  grew  greatly  in 
wealth  and  importance.  Under  Gustavus'  influence  the  mines  of  the 
north  became  vast  sources  of  wealth  ;  manufactures  grew  up  everywhere, 
and  commerce  Avas  fostered  by  treaties  with  England,  France,  Denmark, 
and  Russia.  Before  his  death,  which  took  place  on  Michaelmas  Day, 
1560,  he  had  raised  Sweden  to  a  condition  of  unexampled  prosperity, 
and  had  prepared  the  way  for  the  great  epoch  of  the  next  century. 

We  now  return  to  the  Swedish  Church.  Although  the  Ordinances 
of  Vesteras  had  shorn  it  of  its  grandeur  and  delivered  it  into  Gustavus' 
hands,  they  had  not  abolished  its  essential  character.  On  January  5, 
1528,  the  Bishops  elect  of  Skara,  Strengniis,  and  Abo  were  consecrated 
by  the  Bishop  of  Vesteras  "  by  command  of  the  King,"  without  the 
confirmation  of  the  Pope  indeed,  but  with  the  accustomed  rites  ;  and  on 
the  following  day  Gustavus  himself  was  crowned  by  them  "  with  great 
pomp  "  in  the  Cathedral  of  Upsala.  The  monasteries  were  deprived  of 
most  of  their  property,  and  many  of  them  ceased  to  exist  at  once  ; 
but  the  rest  only  died  away  by  degrees,  until  at  length  there 
remained  but  a  few  nuns  in  the  cloisters  of  Vadstena,  Nadendal, 
Skenninge,  and  Skog,  who  lived  on  the  King's  bounty.     But  no  man 


628  Gradual  Reformation  [i528-40 

in  all  Sweden  died  for  the  old  faith.  A  certain  number  of  the  clergy 
were  deprived,  but  the  bulk  of  them  still  went  on  ;  and  their  general 
condition  may  perhaps  be  gauged  by  the  fact  that  in  not  a  few  cases 
they  married  their  former  housekeeper  or  mistress  in  order  to  legiti- 
matise  the  children.  The  Bishops  had  lost  much  of  their  property, 
but  were  still  comparatively  well  oif  ;  for  many  years  the  new  Arch- 
bishop of  Upsala,  Laurentius  Petri  (called  Nericius),  consecrated  in 
1531,  used  to  support  some  fifty  students  in  Upsala,  and  Bishop 
Skytte  of  Abo  supported  eight  abroad. 

Gustavus  himself  did  all  in  his  power  to  prevent  changes  being 
forced  on  a  reluctant  people.  A  synod  held  at  Orebro  in  1529,  under 
the  presidency  of  Laurentius  Andreae,  provided  that  a  lesson  from  the 
Swedish  Bible  should  be  read  daily  in  all  cathedrals,  and  that  evangeli- 
cal preachers  should  be  appointed  to  carry  the  new  doctrines  about  the 
country  ;  but  the  King  was  so  careful  to  preserve  the  old  ceremonies,  or 
such  of  them  as  "  were  not  repugnant  to  God's  Word,"  that  he  roused  no 
little  indignation  amongst  the  more  extreme  Reformers  as  having  fallen 
away  from  the  Gospel.  In  1528  he  issued  an  ordinance  insisting  upon 
the  payment  of  the  legal  dues  of  the  clergy.  Ten  years  later,  when  the 
nobles  seemed  to  have  learned  too  well  the  lesson  which  he  had  given 
them  in  the  despoiling  of  churches,  he  restrained  and  rebuked  those 
whose  religious  zeal  manifested  itself  only  in  the  way  of  destruction. 
*'  After  this  fashion,"  he  said,  "  every  man  is  a  Christian  and  evangelical." 
Yet  he  recognised  no  limits  to  his  own  power  :  "  it  behoveth  us  as  a 
Christian  monarch,"  he  wrote  to  the  commons  of  the  northern  pro- 
vince, "  to  appoint  ordinances  and  rules  for  you  ;  therefore  must  ye  be 
obedient  to  our  royal  commands,  as  well  in  matters  spiritual  as  tem- 
poral." In  1540,  when  Laurentius  Andreae  and  Olaus  Petri  were 
put  on  their  trial  for  treason  in  not  having  made  known  to  the  King  a 
conspiracy,  the  existence  of  which  they  had  learned  in  confession,  the 
Archbishop  was  compelled  to  be  their  judge.  They  were  condemned 
to  death,  and  only  obtained  pardon  by  the  payment  of  a  large  fine. 

But  although  Gustavus  ever  denied  that  he  was  setting  up  a  new 
Church  in  Sweden,  the  changes  became  more  pronounced  as  time  went 
on,  both  in  doctrine  and  discipline.  Olaus  Petri  was  putting  forth  a 
continual  stream  of  tracts  and  pamphlets  in  Swedish  which  reflected  his 
own  strict  Lutheranism,  and  by  degrees  they  had  a  considerable  effect. 
The  first  Swedish  service-book,  Een  Handhoch ix'id  Swensko,  appeared  in 
1529  ;  it  was  followed  in  1530  by  a  hymn-book,  and  in  1531  by  the 
first  Swedish  "Mass-book"  (^Ordo  Missae  Sueticae),  the  Eucharistic 
doctrine  of  which  was  the  "  Consubstantiation  "  of  Luther's  earlier  days  ; 
all  these  were  many  times  reprinted  in  subsequent  years,  though  the  use 
of  the  Latin  service  was  by  no  means  everywhere  abolished.  Gustavus 
himself  gradually  went  further.  He  repudiated  prayers  for  the  dead, 
and  confession  ;  for  instance,  he  refused  on  his  deathbed  to  listen  to  the 


1539-69]  The  Ordinaries. — Erik  XIV  629 

clergy  when  they  urged  him  to  confess  his  sins  and  seek  absolution.  He 
seems  at  one  time  almost  to  have  contemplated  the  discontinuance  of 
the  episcopal  office.  In  1539  one  George  Norman,  who  had  been  recom- 
mended to  him  by  Melanchthon,  was  appointed,  by  a  commission  not 
unlike  that  which  had  been  given  by  Henry  VHI  to  Cromwell  a  few 
years  before,  to  superintend  and  visit  the  clergy  and  churches  of  Sweden; 
and  a  general  visitation  of  the  whole  kingdom  took  place  under  his 
auspices  in  1540.  From  1541  the  King  refused  to  give  the  episcopal 
title  to  any  but  the  Archbishop  of  Upsala  ;  the  rest  he  styled  Ordinaries. 
As  time  went  on,  the  dioceses  were  divided  up  into  some  twelve  portions 
in  all,  each  under  its  Ordinary.  That  this  division  was  in  itself  desirable 
is  likely  enough,  for  the  old  dioceses  were  very  large  and  unwieldy. 
Moreover  some  at  any  rate  of  Gustavus'  new  Ordinaries  were  in 
episcopal  orders  ;^e.^.  when  the  old  diocese  of  Abo  (Finland)  was 
subdivided  into  Abo  and  Viborg,  the  two  new  Ordinaries,  Michael 
Agricola  (who  had  previously  been  vicar-general  of  the  whole  diocese)  and 
Paulus  Juusten,  were  consecrated  as  Bishops  together  by  Bishop  Bothvid 
of  Strengniis  in  1554.  Nevertheless  the  effect  of  his  action  was 
undoubtedly  to  cast  a  slight  upon  the  episcopal  Order,  and  had  there 
not  been  a  reaction  subsequently  it  must  have  been  highly  prejudicial 
if  not  fatal  to  the  continued  existence  of  episcopacy  in  Sweden. 

The  nine  years  of  Gustavus'  son  and  successor  Erik  XIV  (1560-9), 
for  some  time  the  suitor  of  Elizabeth  of  England,  were  years  of 
disaster  for  the  Swedish  State,  and  not  less  so  for  the  Church.  He 
inclined  towards  Calvinism,  and  already  during  his  father's  lifetime  an 
overture  had  been  made  by  Calvin  towards  the  Swedish  royal  House  by 
the  joint  dedication  of  a  writing  to  father  and  son.  It  was  ineffective  so 
far  as  Gustavus  was  concerned,  but  Erik  on  his  accession  at  once  began 
to  show  favour  towards  Calvinists,  announced  his  intention  of  making 
Sweden  a  refuge  for  distressed  Protestants,  and  used  his  authority  in 
the  Church  to  bring  about  the  suppression  of  a  few  fast  days  and  other 
observances  of  the  old  order.  His  wasteful  extravagance  from  the  first 
pressed  heavily  on  the  State.  But  the  real  afflictions  arose  in  tlie  latter 
part  of  his  reign,  when  he  was  engaged  in  war  both  at  home  and 
abroad,  and  everything  was  allowed  to  fall  into  neglect  ;  churches  fell 
into  ruins,  the  church  plate  disappeared,  benefices  were  not  filled  up, 
or  only  by  incompetent  persons,  and  the  schools  ceased  to  exist.  At 
length  in  1569  Erik  was  dethroned  by  his  brothers,  Johan  and  Karl,  to 
whom  their  father  had  left  hereditary  dukedoms,  and  who  seem  to  have 
agreed  upon  a  joint  conduct  of  the  government  after  Erik's  deposition  ; 
and  some  years  later  he  was  brutally  murdered  in  prison,  in  pursuance 
of  a  vote  of  the  members  of  the  Riksrdd,  both  lay  and  clerical. 

The  new  King,  Johan  III,  was  a  scholar  and  a  theologian,  whose 
reading  of  Cassander  and  other  similar  divines  led  liim  to  lay  all 
possible  stress  upon  the  ancient  order  of  the  Swedish  Church,  whilst 


630  Further  ecclesiastical  changes  [1569-77 

his  love  for  his  consort,  Catharine,  the  sister  of  Sigismund  II  of  Poland, 
who  was  a  Roman  Catholic,  inclined  him  to  seek  a  reconciliation 
with  the  Pope,  if  it  could  be  obtained  on  reasonable  terms.  Under 
his  influence  a  new  Church  order  (Kyrko-ordning)  was  drawn  up  by 
the  aged  Archbishop  Laurentius  Petri  and  put  forth  by  authority,  which 
became  the  basis  of  the  practice  which  prevails  at  the  present  da}^ 
Care  is  taken  for  the  education  and  examination  of  the  clergy,  though 
the  use  by  them  of  books  of  Homilies,  such  as  the  Postilla  of  Olaus  Petri, 
is  permitted.  Latin  psalms  and  prayers  may  still  be  used,  and  confession, 
excommunication,  and  public  penance  are  provided  for.  The  Bishop  is 
elected  by  the  clergy  and  others  having  competent  knowledge,  and  con- 
secrated in  due  course.  The  people  choose  their  minister  and  present 
him  to  the  Bishop,  who  either  ordains  him  or  another  in  his  place ;  but 
it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  same  form  of  service  is  to  be  used  whether 
the  person  so  "  consecrated  "  is  previously  a  layman  or  a  minister  from 
another  charge.  There  are  also  assistant  clergy  or  chaplains  (Kajjellmier') 
in  the  larger  parishes.  Before  long  the  King  was  able  to  make  further 
changes.  The  old  Archbishop  died  in  October,  1573 ;  in  June  of  the 
following  year  "  the  principal  divines  "  were  convened  for  the  election  of 
a  successor,  and  "  the  votes  of  the  great  majorit}^ "  were  given  to  his 
son-in-law,  Laurentius  Petri  Gothus,  who  was  a  student  of  the 
Fathers,  and  in  many  ways  likeminded  with  the  King. 

In  December  the  Archbishop  elect  was  confirmed  by  the  King 
after  giving  his  assent  to  a  series  of  seventeen  articles  which  approved 
of  the  restoration  of  the  convents,  prayers  for  the  dead,  and  the  venera- 
tion of  saints ;  and  on  July  15,  1575,  he  was  consecrated  "  according 
to  the  complete  Catholic  use,"  with  mitre,  crosier,  ring,  and  chrism, 
which  were  also  used  by  the  new  Archbishop  in  future  consecrations  of 
his  suffragans.  A  royal  ordinance  presently  restored  to  the  Archbishop 
that  jurisdiction  over  his  suffragans  which  had  almost  ceased  to  exist 
under  Gustavus ;  and  another  gave  the  Archbishop  and  Chapter  of 
Upsala  a  voice  in  all  elections  of  Bishops.  Other  changes  were  made  of 
the  same  general  character,  and  some  of  the  old  convents  were  reopened. 
In  1576  a  more  important  step  was  taken  :  a  new  liturgy  on  the  lines 
of  the  reformed  Roman  Missal,  tlie  so-called  "  Red  Book  of  Sweden  " 
{Roda  Boke?i),  was  published  ;  it  was  fathered  by  the  Archbishop  in  a 
preface,  but  was  really  the  work  of  the  King  and  his  secretary,  Peter 
Fechen.  It  was  adopted,  after  considerable  opposition  (in  which  the 
Bishops  of  Linkoeping  and  Strengnils  took  part)  at  the  Diet  of  1577  ; 
and  the  King  did  his  best  to  force  it  upon  the  whole  Church.  But  he 
was  never  able  to  compel  all  the  country  clergy  to  use  it ;  and  his 
brother  Karl,  the  Duke  of  Suthermanland  (afterwards  Charles  IX), 
the  ablest  by  far  of  the  "  brood  of  King  Gustavus,"  not  only  refused  to 
adopt  it,  but  made  himself  the  champion  of  the  Kyrho-ordning  of  1571 
and  of   all  who    suffered   for  their  fidelity  to  it.     The  result  during 


1572-9]  Negotiations  with  Rome  631 

Johan's  lifetime  was  estrangement,  and  very  nearly  civil  war,  between 
the  brothers  ;  after  his  death  it  led  to  the  triumph  of  Lutheranism  at 
the  Upsala  mote. 

All  this  time  the  King  was  carrying  on  negotiations  with  the  Papacy. 
So  early  as  1572  Cardinal  Stanislaus  Hosius  was  writing  hopefully  of  his 
conversion.  In  1576  two  Jesuits  from  Louvain,  Florentius  Feyt  and 
Laurentius  the  Norwegian,  appeared  at  Stockholm  in  tlie  guise  of  evan- 
gelical preachers.  They  were  instructed  to  proceed  with  great  caution. 
The  Cardinal  gave  directions  that  the  last-named  was  to  extol  faith  and 
depreciate  works  without  faith,  to  preach  Christ  as  the  only  mediator, 
and  His  cross  as  the  only  means  of  salvation  ;  "  and  thereupon,"  he  pro- 
ceeded, "  let  them  show  that  nothing  else  has  been  preached  in  the  papal 
Church."  We  know  from  their  own  account  that  at  tlie  King's  bidding 
they  concealed  their  real  condition  and  were  taken  for  Lutherans  ;  and 
the  clergy  were  compelled  to  receive  their  instruction,  which  was  carried 
on  in  the  spirit  of  Hosius'  directions.  In  the  same  year  the  King 
sent  messengers  to  Rome  to  negotiate  for  the  restoration  of  the  papal 
authority  in  Sweden.  It  soon  became  evident  that  he  was  asking  for 
conditions  which  were  not  likely  to  be  granted  ;  he  demanded,  amongst 
other  things,  the  concession  of  the  Cup  to  the  laity,  the  partial  use  of 
Swedish  in  the  liturgy,  the  surrender  of  clerical  exemptions,  toleration 
of  the  marriage  of  the  clergy  (though  with  a  preference  for  celibacy), 
and  the  condonation  of  all  that  had  been  done  in  the  past. 

The  time  was  past  for  such  concessions,  although  hopes  of  something 
of  the  kind  were  held  out  more  than  once  by  Cardinal  Hosius  in  his 
letters.  In  1577  however  the  Jesuit  Antony  Possevin  was  sent  to  the 
north,  with  a  commission  as  Legate  to  the  Emperor,  and  instructions  to 
use  all  his  influence  with  King  Johan.  He  made  his  appearance  in  the 
following  year  ;  and  so  great  was  the  impression  which  he  produced  upon 
the  King  that  after  a  few  interviews,  as  we  are  told  in  liis  reports,  Johan 
declared  his  willingness  to  make  the  Tridentine  profession  of  faith  with- 
out waiting  to  see  what  concessions  the  Pope  might  be  willing  to  make 
towards  Sweden.  He  accordingly  did  so,  made  his  confession  and  was 
absolved  (penance  being  imposed  upon  him  for  the  murder  of  his  brother, 
for  which  he  had  always  felt  the  deepest  remorse),  and  received  the 
Communion  in  the  Roman  manner.  This  year,  then,  marks  the  zenith 
of  the  papal  influence.  About  the  same  time  Bishop  jMartin  Olafsson 
of  Linkoeping,  who  had  always  been  opposed  to  the  direction  in  which 
things  were  moving  in  the  Swedish  Church,  was  deposed  and  degradi-d 
for  calling  the  Pope  antichrist.  Luther's  Catechism,  which  had  been  used 
in  the  schools  for  some  years,  was  made  to  give  place  to  that  of  Canisius  ; 
many  Jesuits  were  admitted  into  the  country,  on  one  pretext  or  another, 
and  large  numbers  of  Swedish  boys  were  sent  abroad  to  be  educated  m 
their  seminaries  ;  above  all,  the  primatial  see  was  kept  vacant  for 
four  years  after  the  death  of  Laurentius  Petri  Gothus  in  1579,  m  the 


632         Council  of  the  Swedish  Church  at  Upsala     [1583-93 

hope  that  it  might  next  be  filled  by  an  Archbishop  of  the  Roman 
obedience. 

This  hope  was  doomed  to  be  disappointed,  for  the  proposed  surrender 
proved  to  be  less  attractive  on  a  nearer  view.  The  King's  plans  in 
religion  were  closely  bound  up  with  political  schemes  which  had  for  their 
object  the  obtaining  for  himself  the  Duchies  of  Bari  and  Rossani  in 
right  of  his  wife,  whose  mother  was  a  Sforza  ;  and  these  had  just  received 
a  check.  Gregory  XIII  declined  to  make  the  concessions  which  Johan 
tliought  that  he  had  been  led  to  expect  ;  and  on  further  consideration  he 
found  himself  too  honestly  convinced  of  the  essential  soundness  of  the 
position  of  the  Swedish  Church  to  be  content  to  give  up  all  that  had 
been  won  already.  The  last  shreds  of  the  influence  of  the  Romanising 
party  disappeared  entirely  after  the  death  of  Queen  Catharine  in  1584 ; 
the  Jesuits  and  t\ie.\r  fautores  were  once  more  expelled  ;  and  Johan,  after 
turning  his  thoughts  for  a  moment  towards  the  orthodox  east,  settled 
down  to  the  work  of  consolidating  the  Swedish  Church  as  he  found  it. 

Not  long  afterwards,  however,  the  question  was  reopened,  and  in  a 
more  acute  form,  by  the  death  of  Johan  III  on  November  17, 1592.  The 
crown  fell  to  his  sou  Sigismund,  who  had  been  elected  King  of  Poland  in 
1586,  and  who  was  a  convinced  Roman  Catholic.  With  the  consent  of 
the  Biksrdd,  his  uncle  Duke  Charles  at  once  assumed  the  government  in 
his  name  ;  and  together  they  resolved  to  make  provision  for  the  main- 
tenance of  Protestantism  before  the  new  King  arrived.  The  Mad  was 
anxious  that  the  matter  should  be  dealt  with  by  certain  members  of 
their  own  body  in  conjunction  with  the  delegates  of  the  clergy  ;  but 
Charles  had  made  his  brother  promise  two  years  before  that  a  general 
assembly  (^Kyrko-mdte)  should  be  held,  and  he  assented  to  the  demand  of 
the  clergy  that  it  should  take  place  now.  Accordingly  a  synod  was 
convened  which  was  attended  by  deputies  both  clerical  and  lay  from 
all  parts  of  the  kingdom,  though  Finland  was  but  sparsely  represented. 
There  were  present,  in  addition  to  the  members  of  the  Rihsrdd,  four 
Bishops  (most  of  the  sees  were  vacant,  and  were  filled  whilst  the  Synod 
was  still  in  session),  over  three  hundred  clergy,  and  nearly  as  many  nobles 
and  representatives  of  the  citizens,  miners,  and  peasants.  The  famous 
"  Upsala-mote  "  was  opened  on  February  25,  1593,  Nicolaus  Bothniensis, 
one  of  the  professors  of  theology  at  Upsala,  being  chosen  as  speaker. 
The  assembly  first  laid  down  the  rule  of  Scripture  as  the  basis  of  all 
doctrine.  Then  it  sought  a  doctrinal  standard  ;  and  the  obvious  one 
was  the  Augsburg  Confession,  which  had  already  been  commonly  accepted 
in  Sweden,  though  it  had  never  been  definitely  adopted  by  the  Swedish 
Church.  The  articles  were  now  gone  through  one  by  one,  after  which 
it  was  solemnly  received  as  the  confession  of  the  Swedish  Church. 
Luther's  Catechism  was  again  made  the  basis  for  instruction  in  religion  ; 
the  use  of  the  "  Red  Book"  was  abolished,  and  Laurentius  Petri's  Church 
Ordinance  once  more  became  the  standard  of  worship,  subject  however 


1593]  Swedish  religious  settlement  633 

to  a  certain  amount  of  pruning  in  the  matter  of  ritual.     After  this  the 
Synod  proceeded  to  the  details  of  practical  reform. 

The  Upsala  mote  may  be  considered  the  coping-stone  of  the  Swedish 
Reformation.  Sigismund  came  to  the  throne  with  the  knowledge  that 
his  new  kingdom  had  made  a  definite  stand  from  which  there  could  be 
no  withdrawal ;  and  although  many  efforts  were  made  during  his  reign 
on  behalf  of  Roman  Catholicism,  first  for  concurrent  establishment,  and 
then  for  bare  toleration,  the  issue  was  never  for  a  moment  doubtful. 
The  Swedish  Church  was  definitely  committed  to  Lutheranism;  the 
clergy  continued  to  be  an  estate  of  the  realm  down  to  the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century  ;  and  separation  from  the  national  communion  was  so 
severely  punished  that  until  modern  da3's  organised  dissent  was  practically 
unknown.  The  endeavours  of  Charles  IX,  the  most  learned  of  the  royal 
brothers,  to  widen  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  Swedish  Church,  were  on 
the  whole  unsuccessful.  But  it  was  not  only  in  Sweden  that  the  mote 
had  far-reaching  consequences.  The  definite  adhesion  of  Sweden  to 
the  Augsburg  Confession  gave  strength  to  the  cause  of  Protestantism 
everywhere  :  it  opened  the  way  for  the  Protestant  League  of  the  North 
in  the  following  century. 


NOTE  ON  THE  REFORMATION  IN  POLAND 

The  Reformation  in  Poland,  although  its  influence  on  general 
European  history  in  the  period  treated  in  this  volume  is  comparatively 
slight,  has  some  features  of  special  interest.  It  pursued  its  course  for 
nearly  half-a-century  without  material  hindrance  either  from  the  national 
government  or  the  authorities  of  the  Church.  During  this  era  its 
difficulties  arose  principally  from  the  dissensions  of  the  Reformers,  from 
the  independence  of  the  nobility,  the  ignorance  and  apathy  of  the 
oppressed  peasantry,  and  the  want  of  sympathy  between  the  country 
and  the  towns,  where  the  German  element  was  strong,  and  between  the 
burgliers  and  the  nobles.  Thus  the  evolution  of  a  national  Reformed 
Church  was  impossible  ;  the  Reform  movement  never  obtained  any  vital 
hold  on  the  mass  of  the  people  ;  and  no  united  opposition  could  be 
offered  to  the  forces  of  the  Counter-Reformation,  when  at  length  they 
began  to  act.  On  the  other  hand  the  lack  of  organisation,  of  combina- 
tion, and  of  national  and  ecclesiastical  control,  left  the  way  free  for  the 
most  hazardous  and  audacious  speculations.  Every  man's  intellect  was 
a  law  to  himself,  and  heresy  assumed  its  most  exorbitant  forms. 

The  conditions  of  the  Church  in  Poland  called  for  reform  not  less  than 
elsewhere.  The  Bishops  were  enormously  wealthy ;  and  the  character 
of  the  episcopate  M^as  not  likely  to  be  improved  by  the  measures  of 
1505,  and  1523,  which  were  intended  to  exclude  all  but  nobles  from 
the  bishoprics.  The  right  of  the  King  to  nominate  to  bishoprics  was 
practically  recognised.  In  1459  a  memorable  attack  was  made  upon 
the  administration  of  the  Polish  Church  by  John  Ostrorog,  a  man  not 
only  of  the  highest  rank,  but  of  great  learning.  His  indictment,  made- 
before  the  Diet,  foreshadows  the  general  demand  for  a  reform  of  the 
Church,  though  nothing  is  said  about  doctrine.  The  excessive  authority 
of  the  Pope,  the  immunity  of  the  clergy  from  public  burdens  and  public 
control,  the  exactions  of  the  Papacy,  the  expenses  of  litigation  before  the 
Curia,  indulgences,  simony,  and  the  requirement  of  fees  for  spiritual 
offices,  the  unworthiness  and  ignorance  of  monks  and  clergy,  the  en- 
couragement of  idleness,  are  all  put  forward  with  no  sparing  hand. 
Owing  to  the  privileges  of  the  Polish  nobility  the  power  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical Courts  was  less  in  Poland  than  elsewhere,  and  excommunication 
was  openly  set  at  defiance.     On  the  side  of  doctrine  Hussite  influence, 

634 


1525-48]  The  Reformed  opinions  in  Poland  635 

continually  spreading  in  Poland  during  the  fifteenth  century,  prepared 
the  ground ;  and  the  fact  that  nearly  a  half  of  the  subjects  of  the  Polish 
Crown,  the  Slavonic  population  of  the  South  and  East,  professed  the 
faith  of  the  Greek  Church,  familiarised  the  Jagellon  Kings  with  diver- 
gences in  faith,  and  the  people  with  the  existence  of  other  beliefs. 

It  was  not  long  before  the  movement  initiated  by  Luther  spread  to 
Poland,  and  it  appeared  first  in  Polish  Prussia,  the  western  part  of  the 
territory  of  the  Teutonic  Order,  ceded  by  it  in  1406  to  King  Casimir  III. 
Danzig  was  the  first  centre  of  an  active  propaganda,  and  the  urban 
population  favoured  the  new  opinions.  The  ecclesiastical  authorities 
endeavoured  to  act  with  firmness,  but  found  their  authority  insufficient. 
In  1525  the  Reformers  captured  the  town  government,  and  the  Reforma- 
tion was  set  on  foot.  But  in  the  following  year  Sigismund  I,  then  King 
of  Poland  and  Grand  Duke  of  Lithuania,  took  forcible  measures  to 
suppress  the  Reform.  In  this,  almost  the  only  energetic  step  taken  by 
that  King  against  the  spread  of  Reform,  he  was  actuated  by  political 
motives.  In  1523  Albert  of  Brandenburg,  the  last  Grand  Master  of 
the  Teutonic  Order,  had  adopted  the  Reform,  and  in  1525  he  converted 
the  dominions  entrusted  to  his  charge  into  a  hereditary  dukedom ;  and 
Sigismund  feared  that  the  Reforming  tendencies  of  West  Prussia  might 
lead  the  inhabitants  into  closer  political  relations  with  the  emancipated 
master  of  East  Prussia.  In  spite,  however,  of  Sigismund's  temporary 
success  at  Danzig,  Lutheran  opinions  continued  to  spread,  and  finally 
triumphed  in  Polish  Prussia. 

In  Poland  itself  frequent  acts  against  the  new  opinions  were  passed 
by  ecclesiastical  synods,  in  1527,  1530,  1532,  1542,  and  1544.  But 
the  Church  was  powerless  in  face  of  the  famous  Polish  privilege,  "  nevii- 
7iem  captivare  nisi  jure  victum,''  and  the  other  immunities  of  the  nobles. 
The  ecclesiastical  Courts  were  regarded  with  general  contempt.  The 
hostility  of  the  Diets  was  undisguised.  In  1538  they  forbade  the  Polish 
clergy  to  receive  any  preferment  from  the  Pope,  in  1543  they  abolished 
annates,  and  in  1544  they  subjected  the  clergy  to  ordinary  taxation. 
Sigismund  I  issued  an  order  in  1534  forbidding  Polish  students  to  study 
at  foreign  universities,  but  this  order  was  cancelled  in  1543;  and  the 
inaction  of  Sigismund  proclaims  either  his  impotence  or  his  lack  of  zeal. 
His  son,  Sigismund  II  Augustus,  who  succeeded  in  1548,  was  probably 
rather  friendly  than  indifferent.  In  any  case  the  power  of  the  King  was 
little;  and  individual  nobles  took  what  line  they  pleased  without  refer- 
ence to  King  or  Church. 

In  these  circumstances  not  only  did  Lutheran  views  spread  treely 
but  other  heresies  appeared.  A  society  was  formed  at  Cracow,  under 
the  influence  of  Francisco  Lismanini,  wliich  not  only  ventilated  the 
opinions  of  the  more  orthodox  Reformers,  but  also  cast  doubt  upon  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  In  1548  the  Reformation  in  Pohuvl  received  a 
great  impulse  by  the  expulsion  from  Bohemia  of  the  Bohemian  Brethren, 


636  Religious  anarchy  [1548-72 

a  sect  which  received  a  definite  organisation  about  1456,  and  had  sur- 
vived through  many  vicissitudes,  preserving  many  of  the  more  advanced 
Hussite  opinions.  Luther,  at  first  hostile  to  their  views,  afterwards 
became  reconciled,  and  established  a  spiritual  communion  with  them. 
Ferdinand,  after  other  repressive  measures  had  failed,  expelled  them  from 
his  territories;  and  on  their  way  towards  Prussia  they  found  temporary 
hospitality  in  Posen,  where  they  were  entertained  by  Andreas  Gorka, 
the  Castellan  of  Posen.  The  Bishop  of  Posen,  however,  before  long  pro- 
cured their  expulsion;  they  passed  into  Prussia,  leaving  behind,  however, 
many  converts;  and  their  congregations  afterwards  evangelised  many 
districts  of  Posen  and  of  Great  Poland. 

The  reign  of  Sigismund  Augustus  (1548-72)  saw  the  Polish  Refor- 
mation at  its  height.  The  Synod  of  Piotrkow  in  1552,  at  which 
Stanislaus  Hosius,  the  Bishop  of  Ermland,  first  took  a  prominent  part 
as  a  defender  of  the  Church,  initiated  a  vigorous  campaign  against  the 
Reform ;  but  although  the  clergy  procured  the  martyrdom  of  a  poor 
priest,  they  found  themselves  helpless  against  the  nobles.  The  Diet  of 
1552  left  to  the  clergy  the  power  of  judging  heresy,  but  deprived  them 
of  the  authority  to  inflict  any  civil  or  political  penalty.  In  the  same 
year  a  Polish  Reformer,  Modrzewski,  laid  before  the  King  a  remarkable 
and  moderate  scheme  of  national  ecclesiastical  reform;  but  there  w^as  no 
authority  capable  of  carrying  it  out.  In  1556  licence  assumed  the 
form  of  law,  and  the  principle  of  cujus  regio  was  carried  to  its  extreme 
consequence,  when  the  Diet  enacted  that  every  nobleman  could  introduce 
into  his  own  house  any  form  of  worship  at  his  pleasure,  provided  that 
it  was  in  conformity  with  the  Scriptures.  The  King  at  this  time  also 
demanded  from  Pope  Paul  IV  in  the  name  of  the  Diet  the  concession  of 
mass  in  the  vernacular,  communion  in  both  kinds,  the  marriage  of 
priests,  the  abolition  of  annates,  and  a  National  Couiicil  for  Reform 
and  the  union  of  sects.  He  received  in  the  following  year  a  stinging 
reprimand  from  the  fiery  Pontiff  for  an  offence  in  which  he  was  little 
more  than  a  passive  agent. 

The  Reformation  seemed  to  be  triumphant.  But  excessive  libert}'- 
was  a  source  of  weakness.  The  Bohemian  brethren,  indeed,  formed  a 
durable  union  with  the  Genevan  Churches  in  Poland  in  1555.  The 
former  were  most  powerful  in  Posen  and  Great  Poland,  the  latter  in 
Little  Poland  and  Lithuania.  But  the  Lutherans  were  a  persistent 
obstacle  to  union.  It  was  hoped  that  the  return  of  John  Laski  (a  Lasco) 
to  his  native  land  in  1556  might  put  an  end  to  divisions.  This  member 
of  a  noble  Polish  house  had  listened  to  the  voice  of  Zwingli  and  Erasmus 
in  his  youth,  and  afterwards  had  renounced  his  prospects  of  high  pre- 
ferment in  his  own  Church  in  order  to  preach  reform.  His  self-denying 
labours  in  East  Friesland  had  been  crowned  with  success,  and  as  head  of 
the  community  of  foreign  Reformers  in  London  he  had  Avon  a  reputation 
beyond  the  Channel.     His  gentle  nature,  and  the  moderate  character 


1560-79]       Protestant  dissensions.  —  The  Sozzini  637 

of  his  opinions,  which,  although  they  were  nearest  to  those  of  Calvin 
and  Zwingli,  were  calculated  to  give  the  least  possible  offence  to  the 
Lutherans,  raised  great  hopes  of  him  as  a  mediator.  But  he  died  in 
1560,  having  effected  nothing. 

Protestant  dissensions  continued,  andthe  Protestant  cause  was  further 
discredited  by  the  activity  of  the  anti-Trinitarians.  Lismanini  had 
openly  denied  the  Trinity,  and  Bernardino  Ochino  in  156-4  found  many 
hearers.  He  was  expelled,  however,  very  shortly.  The  Unitarians  had 
their  centre  at  Pinczow,  near  Cracow,  and  among  their  leaders  were 
first  Stancari  and  Lismanini,  and  afterwards  Georgio  Biandrata,  and 
Peter  Gonesius,  a  Pole.  Even  in  the  face  of  this  double  danger,  from 
their  own  advanced  wing  and  from  the  Catholic  side,  the  Protestants 
failed  to  achieve  unity.  At  length  at  the  synod  of  Sandomir,  1570, 
mutual  toleration  rather  than  union  was  arranged  between  the  Lutlierans 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  united  Church  of  Genevans  and  Bohemians  on 
the  other.  Thus  the  critical  time  of  the  death  of  Sigismund  Augustus 
in  1572  found  the  Protestant  sects  widely  spread  in  the  Polish  dominions, 
enjoying  virtual  toleration,  but  probably  not  very  deeply  rooted  in 
tlie  Polish  people,  compromised  by  advanced  freethinkers,  and  barely 
concealing  their  mutual  antagonism. 

Meanwhile  dangers  were  arising.  The  direct  efforts  of  Stani,slaus 
Hosius,  the  mission  of  Lippomani  in  1555,  and  that  of  Commendoni  in 
1563,  did  little  to  check  the  Reformed  opinions.  But  from  the  intro- 
duction of  the  Jesuits  into  Poland  at  the  suggestion  of  Cardinal  llosius 
in  1564,  and  from  the  transfer  into  their  hands  of  the  institutions  of 
higher  education  founded  by  him  in  Poland,  dates  the  beginning  of  a 
more  insidious  and  effective  opposition,  which  was  destined  in  a  period 
beyond  our  present  scope  to  attain  complete  success. 

This  brief  note  may  serve  to  show  the  position  of  the  new  religions 
in  Poland  down  to  the  death  of  Sigismund  Augustus.  But  the  name  of 
Socinus  is  so  closely  linked  with  the  religious  history  of  that  country  and 
with  that  oi"  the  dissidentes  de  religione  (the  appellation  given  in  Poland 
in  1573  to  the  adherents  of  the  Reformation,  though  afterwards  extended 
in  its  significance),  that  a  word  must  be  said  about  the  two  well-known 
teachers  of  that  name.  Lelio  Sozzini  was  a  native  of  Siena,  born  in 
1525.  Attracted  early  by  the  writings  of  Luther,  he  made  himself 
suspected  at  home,  and  travelled  widely  throughout  Europe,  coming 
into  contact  with  all  the  leading  Reformers.  He  visited  Poland  twice, 
and  doubtless  found  kindred  spirits  there ;  he  probably  influenced 
Lismanini;  but  although  the  audacity  of  his  opinions  and  the  free 
expression  of  his  doubts  seem  to  have  caused  him  to  be  regarded  with 
suspicion  by  more  orthodox  Reformers,  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
actually  denied  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  He  died  in  1562.  His 
nephew,  Fausto  Sozzini,  passed  the  line.  He  also  was  born  at  Siena 
in   1539.     He    came   to  Poland    in    1579,   after   the   anti-Trinitarian 


638  The  Socinians 


opinions  had  long  been  developed  there.  Under  the  protection  of  the 
Transylvanian  Prince,  Stephen  Bathory,  the  sect  had  flourished,  and 
had  acquired  in  the  town  of  Racow  its  own  school,  church,  and  printing- 
press.  Sozzini  speedily  won  great  influence,  and  was  able  to  influence 
the  doctrines  of  the  Unitarians.  Eventually  the  sect  received  his  name» 
and  was  known  as  Socinian. 

The  distinctive  doctrine  of  the  Socinians  was  the  denial  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  the  teaching  of  One  Gpd.  They  recognised 
divinity  in  the  Father  alone,  and  denied  it  to  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost.  They  reverenced  Christ  as  the  Messiah,  as  a  teacher  and  a 
reformer,  but  as  a  human  being.  They  believed  nevertheless  in  His 
supernatural  birth,  in  His  miracles.  His  resurrection.  His  ascension. 
They  believed  that  He  received  revelations  from  the  Father,  They 
followed  also  the  Bible  as  their  guide  and  standard  ;  giving  it  their  own 
interpretation,  which  differed  from  that  of  the  Protestants  and  of  the 
Fathers  of  Nicaea.  They  rejected  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  original 
sin,  and  believed  that  salvation  was  to  be  obtained  by  conscientious 
following  of  Christ's  teaching,  and  virtuous  living.  They  rejected 
therefore  also  the  doctrine  of  the  Atonement.  Baptism  was  for  thera 
only  the  symbol  of  admission  into  the  Christian  communion,  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  a  mere  memorial.  This  remarkable  sect  had  its  origin 
in  the  active  brains  of  speculative  Italians,  its  favourable  ground  for 
growth  in  the  religious  liberty  or  anarchy  of  Poland,  but  it  received  its 
definite  organisation,  its  tenets,  and  its  name  from  Fausto  Sozzini. 


CHAPTER   XVIII 


THE   CHURCH  AND  REFORM 


The  necessity  of  reform  and  of  a  spiritual  regeneration  of  Catholicism 
had  been  acknowledged  again  and  again  at  the  opening  of  the  sixteenth 
century  by  men  of  high  position  in  the  Church.  Time  after  time  it  was 
admitted  by  the  Sacred  College,  and  at  each  Conclave  the  whole  body  of 
Cardinals  pledged  themselves  to  reform.  Commissions  were  appointed 
but  nothing  came  of  them  ;  and  the  Fifth  Lateran  Council  (1512-17), 
instead  of  reforming  the  evils  that  had  resulted  from  excessive  centrali- 
sation, did  little  more  than  lay  down  the  '■'■plenitudo  potestatis'^  of  the 
papal  monarchy  with  an  insistency  that  had  hitherto  found  expression 
only  in  the  pages  of  curialist  writers. 

The  vested  interests  of  the  officials  of  the  Roman  Court  were  in  fact 
too  strong  for  the  forces  working  for  reform  ;  and  the  measures  wliich 
might  have  obviated  the  schism  and  nipped  the  revolution  in  the  bud 
were  not  taken  until  it  was  too  late.  The  opponents  of  reform  had  the 
strength  of  a  group  of  men  working  together  with  a  definite  knowledge 
of  what  they  wanted  to  defend.  The  Catholic  reformers  on  the  other 
hand  were  scattered,  voices  in  the  desert,  with  no  means  of  common 
action.  Nor,  when  opportunities  occurred  to  them,  were  they  for  long 
agreed  as  to  the  particular  lines  reform  should  take.  The  seeds  of  the 
later  divisions  among  the  Catholic  reformers  existed  from  the  very  first, 
and  the  course  of  events  soon  led  to  those  differences  becoming  acute. 
For  men  desired  reform  from  very  different  motives.  The  ascetic  tem- 
perament saw  notliing  but  the  moral  abuses  and  the  corruption  of  the 
clergy ;  the  humanist  desired  a  greater  freedom  of  thought,  and  a  certain 
toleration  of  divergences  of  opinion  which  was  abhorrent  to  the  doctrinal 
reformer.  The  latter  shared  with  the  humanist  the  wish  for  a  recon- 
struction of  the  traditional  dogma,  but  wished  to  see  the  line  between 
orthodoxy  and  heterodoxy  drawn  with  no  uncertain  liand.  Ultimately, 
two  great  parties  evolved  themselves  among  the  Catholic  reformers  :  the 
one  desired  conciliation  and  the  discovery  of  a  common  ground  on 
which  the  old  and  the  new  ideas  might  be  harmonised  ;  the  other,  while 
sharing  with  the  former  party  its  indignation  at  the  moral  corruption  of 

639 


640  The  Oratory  of  Divine  Love  [l52i-2 

the  Church,  yet  parted  company  with  it  with  regard  to  the  reform  of 
doctrine.  Tiie  supremacy  of  St  Thomas  and  of  the  great  scholastics 
must  be  preserved,  and  the  whole  body  of  dogma  which  the  Middle  Ages 
had  evolved  must  be  retained.  Concession  of  any  kind  was  not  to  be 
heard  of  ;  and  tliis  party  believed  that  a  further  increase  of  the  powers 
of  the  Papacy  and  of  the  centralisation  of  authority  was  the  surest 
safeguard  of  the  Church.  The  former  party  wished  for  a  real  Catholic 
reformation  ;  the  latter  succeeded  in  reducing  a  movement  which  started 
with  so  great  a  promise  to  little  more  than  a  counter-reformation.  It 
will  be  our  purpose  in  this  chapter  to  sketch  the  steps  by  which  this  was 
brought  about,  and  all  real  reform,  such  as  might  have  conciliated 
nascent  Protestantism  and  preserved  the  unity  of  the  Western  Church, 
was  made  impossible. 

The  aspirations  of  scattered  individuals  for  reform  first  found  a 
nucleus  and  an  organisation  in  the  "■  Oratory  of  Divine  Love,"  founded 
at  Rome  towards  the  end  of  the  Pontificate  of  Leo  X.  This  famous 
society  numbered  among  its  members  some  of  the  most  learned  prelates 
and  upright  laymen  who  were  connected  with  the  Court  of  Rome  in  that 
day.  They  met  for  prayer  and  meditation  in  the  little  church  of 
Santi  Silvestro  e  Dorotea  in  Trastevere  and  discussed  means  for  the  puri- 
fication of  the  Church.  Almost  every  tendency  of  thought  and  tem- 
perament among  the  Catholic  reformers  was  to  be  found  there.  Caraffa 
and  Sadoleto,  Gaetano  da  Thiene  and  Giberti  were  alike  members.  The 
ascetic  and  the  humanist,  the  practical  and  the  doctrinal  reformer  met 
together  and  worked  in  harmony.  Their  numbers  were  some  fifty  or 
sixty  in  all.  In  the  last  years  of  the  Pagan  Renaissance,  when  its  weaker 
elements  were  coming  to  the  surface,  and  when  decadence  rather  than  a 
new  interest  in  life  was  becoming  its  keynote,  there  was  thus  growing  in 
numbers  and  influence  a  party  full  of  promise  for  the  future  history  of 
the  Church.  A  stern  and  almost  Puritan  moral  ideal  was  combined 
with  a  belief  that  there  was  no  essential  antagonism  between  faith  and 
culture,  between  profane  learning  and  Christian  knowledge.  As  the 
great  medieval  theologians  and  scholastics  had  interpreted  Christianity 
to  their  age,  and  had  harmonised  the  divergent  elements  in  the  know- 
ledge of  their  time,  so  now  in  the  Oratory  of  Divine  Love  the  feeling 
found  expression  that  the  work  had  to  be  done  afresh,  and  that  the  new 
revelation  given  to  men  by  the  Renaissance  must  be  incorporated  into 
the  system  of  Christian  thought. 

Nor  was  it  only  the  desire  for  a  closer  alliance  between  Christianity 
and  humanism  which  bound  many  of  these  men  together.  Augustine 
had  always  been  a  force  in  the  medieval  Church,  and  the  Augustinian 
elements  in  its  theology  were  ever  again  asserting  themselves  and  claim- 
ing supremacy.  The  attraction  of  Augustine  felt  so  strongly  by  Luther 
was  not  felt  only  by  him.    The  end  of  the  fifteenth  and  the  beginning  of 


1522-34]  Catholic  reformers. —  Adrian  VI  G41 


the  sixteenth  centuries  were  marked  by  a  renewed  study  of  St  Augustine 
in  many  quarters,  and  by  a  consequent  revival  of  the  Pauline  ideas  of 
Justification  in  different  forms.  As  Reginald  Pole  said  in  one  of  his 
letters,  the  jewel  which  the  Churcli  had  so  long  kept  half  concealed  was 
again  brought  to  light.  This  trend  of  thought  found  expression  in  the 
writings  of  Thomas  de  Vio,  Cardinal  Cajetan,  and  for  some  time  was 
looked  on  with  favour  in  the  highest  quarters  of  the  Church.  That 
section  of  the  Oratory  of  Divine  Love  which  wished  to  spiritualise  the- 
ology and  to  deepen  the  bases  of  the  Christian  life  found  ample  support 
in  the  accepted  theology  of  the  day. 

Venice  was  the  home  from  which  came  many  of  the  thinkers  of  this 
type  in  the  Oratory  of  Divine  Love.  After  the  Sack  of  Rome  in  1527  its 
members  were  scattered ;  but  in  a  short  time  many  of  them  met  again  at 
Venice,  wdiere  they  found  new  recruits.  The  Senator  Gasparo  Contarini 
and  Gregorio  Cortese,  Abbot  of  San  Georgio  Maggiore,  Avere  the 
most  influential  of  the  new  members.  Giberti  had  become  Bishop  of 
Verona  in  1524,  and  his  household  became  a  new  centre  for  the  reforming 
movement.  His  administration  of  his  diocese  set  an  example  to  other 
prelates  ;  and  his  reform  of  his  clergy  served  in  many  ways  as  a  model  to 
the  Fathers  at  Trent,  though  he  himself  did  not  live  to  take  any  active 
part  in  that  assembly.  At  Padua  Reginald  Pole  spent  many  years,  and 
though  he  was  only  a  layman  his  manner  of  life  and  conduct  of  his 
household  were  not  unworthy  to  be  compared  with  those  of  Giberti. 
The  University  of  Padua  numbered  then  among  its  teachers  some  of  the 
most  eminent  scholars  of  the  day,  and  it  was  one  of  the  centres  of  the 
Christian  Renaissance.  Modena  also  was  one  of  the  strongholds  of 
the  Catholic  reformers;  Giovanni  Morone,  who  afterwards  with  diffi- 
culty escaped  the  charge  of  heresy,  was  its  Bishop.  Sadoleto,  Bishop  of 
Carpentras,  Gregorio  Cortese,  and  other  leaders  of  the  movement  either 
were  Modenese  or  had  been  connected  with  Modena.  The  union  of 
scholarship  and  holiness  of  life  with  zeal  for  practical  reform,  as  exem- 
plified in  these  men,  is  rare  in  the  history  of  the  Church. 

The  movement  for  reform  from  within  thus  inaugurated  in  Italy  did 
not  become  a  power  in  official  circles  in  Rome  until  the  pontificate  of 
Paul  III.  The  paper  reforms  of  the  Fifth  Lateran  remained  a  dead 
letter,  while  the  good  intentions  of  Adrian  VI  came  to  nothing.  His 
reign,  nevertheless,  will  ever  be  memorable  from  his  confession  that  the 
source  of  the  poison  which  was  corrupting  the  whole  Church  was  in  the 
papal  Court,  nay  even  in  the  Pontiffs  themselves.  Ignorant  of  the 
world,  ignorant  of  the  forces  at  work  in  Rome  itself,  Adrian  was  helpless. 
If  he  had  had  any  measure  of  success,  his  reforms  would  have  been  of  a 
moral  and  practical  kind  alone.  Having  lived  most  of  his  life  in 
cloisters,  he  knew  little  of  the  change  that  had  come  over  human  thought. 
St  Thomas  was  his  master,  and  he  did  not  wish  to  go  beyond  the  work  of 
the  greatest  of  medieval  thinkers.     Adrian  was  a  precursor  of  Caraffa 


6^2  Clement  VII  and  Paul  III  [1523-34 

and  the  later  Counter-Reformation,  rather  than  of  the  peace-loving 
Contarini  and  the  learned  Giberti. 

Clement  VII,  of  the  House  of  Medici,  was  well-meaning  and  wished 
to  remove  the  worst  abuses  in  the  Church.  The  hell  through  which  the 
Papacy  passed  during  his  pontificate  was  indeed  paved  with  good  in- 
tentions, but  they  all  came  to  nothing.  The  cares  of  the  temporal  power 
and  the  interests  of  his  family  left  little  time  for  the  reformation  of 
society.  Still  in  1524  the  Roman  Congregation  was  set  up  to  reform 
the  clergy ;  but  in  the  troublous  years  which  followed,  leading  up  to 
the  Sack  of  Rome,  little  could  be  done.  Giberti,  who  with  Nicholas 
Schomberg,  the  Cardinal  of  Capua,  appears  to  have  influenced  Clement's 
policy  in  those  early  years  of  his  reign,  had  little  time  to  spare  from 
secular  affairs  ;  and  it  was  not  until  he  finally  retired  to  his  Bishopric  of 
Verona  that  he  obtained  an  opportunity  of  playing  the  part  of  a  re- 
former. Thus,  while  the  Teutonic  lands  were  rapidly  falling  away  from 
the  Church,  nothing  was  done  in  Rome  itself  to  heal  the  abuses  which 
all  men  acknowledged  to  be  crying  for  reform. 

There  was  one  remedy  for  the  Church's  evils  which  was  a  nightmare 
to  Clement.  A  reform  of  the  Church  by  a  free  General  Council  was 
a  cry  which  grew  in  intensity  and  sprang  up  from  many  quarters  as 
Clement's  vacillating  reign  dragged  on  its  way.  Luther  had  appealed 
from  the  Pope  to  a  free  General  Council ;  and  the  appeal  was  echoed  in 
the  German  Diets.  Charles  himself  took  up  the  idea ;  but,  as  it  soon 
came  to  be  seen  that  what  Charles  meant  by  a  General  Council  was  very 
different  from  that  desired  by  the  Protestants,  the  enthusiasm  for  it  soon 
cooled  down  in  Germany ;  and  the  idea  of  a  National  Council  for  the 
settlement  of  the  affairs  of  religion  took  its  place.  At  times,  when  it 
was  a  useful  weapon  to  be  used  against  the  Pope,  Charles  also  gave  the 
idea  of  a  National  Council  his  support ;  but  he  sincerely  desired  the  con- 
vocation of  an  Ecumenical  Council,  and  he  fell  back  on  the  alternative 
only  when  the  conduct  of  the  Papacy  forced  his  hands.  General  Coun- 
cils had  ominous  memories  for  the  Papacy  since  the  days  of  Pisa,  Con- 
stance, and  Basel ;  and  Clement  no  doubt  felt  that  the  government  of 
the  Church  during  his  pontificate  would  not  stand  the  ordeal  of  a  public 
examination.  General  Councils  were  apt  to  get  out  of  hand,  and  no  one 
could  foresee  whither  they  might  ultimately  lead.  Clement  succeeded 
in  putting  off  the  evil  day  at  the  price  of  letting  events  in  Germany 
take  their  own  course. 

With  Clement's  successor,  Alessandro  Farnese,  who  took  the  title  of 
Paul  III  (1534),  a  new  era  began ;  and  at  last  the  party  of  Catholic 
reformers  found  their  opportunity.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  the  new  Pope 
was  to  confer  a  Cardinal's  hat  upon  Gasparo  Contarini ;  and  soon  after 
Caraffa,  Sadoleto,  and  Pole  also  received  the  sacred  purple.  The  leaders 
among  the  Catholic  reformers  were  summoned  to  Rome.  On  January  30, 
1536,  a  Bull  was  read  in  the  Consistory  for  the  reform  of  many  of  the 


1536-7]  Paul  III  and  reform  643 

papal  offices,  but  it  was  not  published  ;  and  in  the  summer  of  the  same 
year  Paul  appointed  a  commission  of  nine  to  report  on  the  reforms  that 
were  needful.  The  nine  members  of  the  commission  were  Contarini, 
Caraffa,  Sadoleto,  Giberti,  Pole,  Aleander,  Federigo  Fregoso,  Gregorio 
Cortese,  and  the  Master  of  the  Sacred  Palace,  Tommaso  Badia.  Their 
report  presented  in  1537  is  the  well-known  Consilium  delectorum  cardi- 
nalium  et  aliorum  praelatorum  de  emendanda  ecclesia.  The  great  principle 
to  which  they  return  again  and  again  is  that  laws  ought  not  to  be  dis- 
pensed with  save  for  grave  cause,  and  that  even  then  no  money  should 
be  taken  for  dispensation.  To  the  system  of  money  payments  they  trace 
the  chief  evils  of  the  Roman  Court.  Everything  could  be  obtained  for 
money,  however  hurtful  it  might  be  to  the  general  welfare  of  the  Church. 
The  report  does  not  confine  itself  to  the  evils  at  the  fountain-head.  The 
wholeChurch  wasinfected  with  corruption.  Unfit  persons  were  habitually 
ordained  and  admitted  to  benefices.  Pensions  and  charges  were  imposed 
upon  the  revenues  of  benefices  which  made  it  impossible  for  the  holder  to 
live  an  honest  life.  Expectatives  and  reservations  had  a  demoralising 
effect.  Residence  was  generally  neglected  by  the  Bishops  and  clergy ; 
and  exemptions  from  the  authority  of  the  Ordinary  enabled  leaders  of 
scandalous  lives  to  persist  in  their  wickedness.  The  regular  clergy  were 
no  better  than  the  seculars.  Scandals  were  frequent  in  the  religious 
Houses  ;  and  the  privileges  of  the  Orders  enabled  unfit  persons  to  hear 
confessions.  The  Cardinals  were  as  bad  as  the  Bishops  with  regard  to 
residence,  and  accumulated  offices  in  their  persons.  Indulgences  were 
excessive  in  number,  and  superstitious  practices  were  too  often  encouraged. 
Much  evil  had  followed  from  the  granting  of  marriage  dispensations  , 
and  absolutions  for  the  sin  of  simony  could  be  obtained  for  a  mere  song. 
In  Rome  itself  the  services  were  slovenly  conducted  and  the  whole  priest- 
hood was  sordid.  Loose  women  were  openly  received  even  in  the  houses 
of  Cardinals.  Unbelief  grew  apace,  and  unnecessary  disputations  on 
trivial  points  disturbed  the  faith  of  the  vulgar.  It  was  the  duty  of  the 
Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  Churches  to  lead  the  way  in  the  amending  of 
these  evils. 

Simultaneously  with  the  appointment  of  this  remarkable  commission 
for  reform  Paul  III  published  a  Bull  (May  29,  153G),  summoning  a 
General  Council  to  meet  at  Mantua  in  May,  1537  ;  and  a  Bull  of 
Reformation  was  published  in  September,  1536.  But  the  renewal  of  war 
prevented  the  Council  from  assembling,  and  its  meeting  was  deferred. 
Meanwhile  little  was  done  to  carry  out  the  proposals  of  the  reform 
commission.  It  was  decided  on  the  suggestion  of  the  Cardinal  of 
Capua,  Nicholas  Schomberg,  not  to  publish  the  report,  as  it  revealed 
so  many  grave  scandals  in  connexion  with  the  Holy  See.  The  docu- 
ment was  however  privately  printed  in  Rome,  and  by  some  means 
a  copy  reached  Germany.  It  was  republished  there  with  scoffing 
comments.     This  incident  shows  that  there  was  little  chance  of  any 


644  Contarini  and  Paul  III  [i537-8 

papal  attempts  at  reform  being  regarded  in  Germany  as  seriously 
intended.  A  beginning  was  indeed  made  at  Rome.  The  offices  of  the 
Datary,  the  Chancery,  and  the  Penitentiary  were  overhauled  ;  and 
a  report  signed  by  Contarini,  Caraffa,  Aleander,  and  Badia  —  the 
"  Consilium  quattuor  delectorum  a  Paulo  III  super  Reformatione  sanetae 
Momanae  Ecclesiae'''' — was  in  the  autumn  of  1537  presented  to  the  Pope. 

Bat  in  reality  little  seems  to  have  been  done.  The  General  Council 
never  met  at  Mantua.  The  Duke  did  not  desire  its  presence  in  his 
territory  ;  and  the  war  between  Charles  and  Francis  made  it  practically 
impossible.  The  Council  Avas  then  summoned  to  meet  at  Vicenza  on 
May  1,  1538,  but  it  again  had  to  be  postponed.  It  soon  became  clear 
that  the  Pope's  zeal  for  reform  was  rapidly  waning.  Contarini  did 
his  best  to  stir  him  up  to  action.  In  his  "  Ejyistola  de  potestate 
Pontijicis  in  usu  clavium "  and  in  his  "  De  potestate  Pontificis  in 
compositionibus "  he  emphasised  the  propositions  that  the  Papacy 
was  a  sacred  charge,  and  that  its  powers  were  to  be  used  for  the 
good  of  the  Church  and  not  to  its  destruction.  In  all  Contarini's 
writings  the  conception  of  the  Papacy  as  a  monarchy  and  not  a 
tyranny  appears.  It  is  a  monarchy  over  freemen,  and  its  powers  are 
to  be  used  according  to  the  light  of  reason.  Though  the  Catholic 
reformers  held  strongly  to  the  divine  mission  of  the  Papacy  in  the 
Church,  they  distinguished  carefully  between  the  legitimate  and  the 
illegitimate  exercise  of  its  authority.  Freely  the  Papacy  had  received, 
freely  it  should  give.  The  whole  ofQcial  system  of  the  Curia  with  its 
fees  and  extortions  had  become  a  scandal.  An  iniquitous  traffic  in 
sacred  things  had  grown  up.  Contarini  appealed  to  the  Pope  to  root 
out  effectively  this  canker,  which  was  destroying  the  spiritual  life  of  the 
Church.  In  November,  1538,  Contarini  travelled  with  Paul  III  to  Ostia, 
and  they  discussed  his  writings.  "  Our  good  old  man,"  as  Contarini 
calls  him  in  a  letter  to  Pole,  made  him  sit  by  his  side,  and  talked  with 
him  about  the  reform  of  the  compositiones.  The  Pope  informed  him 
that  he  had  read  his  treatise,  and  spoke  to  him  with  such  Christian 
feeling  that  his  hopes  were  thus  awakened  anew  at  the  moment  when 
he  was  about  to  give  way  to  despair. 

Sarpi  doubts  the  sincerity  of  Paul  III  with  regard  to  reform.  He 
believes  that  the  Pope  took  up  various  projects  of  reform  merely  as  an 
excuse  to  prove  that  a  Council  was  unnecessary.  But  Sarpi's  prejudice 
always  blinds  him  to  any  good  action  on  the  part  of  a  Pope  ;  and  there 
is  little  doubt  that  Paul  was  in  earnest  in  wishing  to  remove  the  graver 
abuses  of  the  papal  Court.  But  he  was  an  old  man  when  he  ascended 
the  papal  throne,  and  his  energy  did  not  increase  with  years ;  more- 
over, he  was  not  a  zealot,  possessed  with  one  overmastering  idea.  The 
interests  of  his  family,  his  own  personal  comfort,  and  the  dignity  of  the 
Holy  See,  were  to  him  things  that  were  not  to  be  lightly  risked  in  the 
carrying  out  of  any  scheme  of  reform. 


1538-41]  Reli(jl()us  Colloquy  at  Ratishon  645 

Nothing  came  immediately  of  his  talk  with  Coutarini  in  the  autumn 
of  1538 ;  but  in  the  spring  of  1540  a  fresh,  and,  as  it  ajjpeared,  a  more 
energetic  beginning  of  reform  was  made  in  Rome.  In  April  Giberti 
was  summoned  from  his  diocese  to  give  the  Sacred  College  the  benefit 
of  his  experience;  and  commissions  were  appointed  for  carrying  out 
reforms  in  the  Apostolic  Chamber,  the  Rota,  the  Chancer}-,  and  the  Peni- 
tentiary. The  hopes  with  which  the  pontificate  had  begun  were  fully 
revived.  Giovanni  Morone,  the  papal  Nuncio  in  Germany,  had  again 
and  again  in  his  letters  pressed  upon  the  Pope  the  necessity  of  a  Council 
and  of  energetic  measures  of  reform,  if  the  Church  was  to  be  saved  in 
Germany.  ]Morone's  instructions  ordered  him  to  be  as  conciliatory  as 
possible ;  and  it  seemed  that  moderate  men  on  both  sides  might  arrange 
an  understanding.  The  proposal  of  Faber,  the  Bishop  of  Vienna,  to 
condemn  as  heretical  a  series  of  propositions  selected  from  Lutheran 
writers,  was  disapproved  of  by  the  Pope.  The  failure  so  far  of  the 
attempts  to  assemble  a  General  Council  made  Charles  fall  back  on  a 
series  of  national  conferences,  in  which  endeavours  were  made  to  find 
some  common  terms  of  agreement  that  might  serve  as  a  basis  for  the 
action  of  the  Ecumenical  Council  when  it  should  meet. 

It  was  in  pursuance  of  this  policy  that  the  famous  Religious  Collo- 
quy took  place  at  Ratisbon  in  April,  1541,  after  preliminary  meetings  at 
Hagenau  (June,  1540)  and  at  Worms  (November,  1540).  The  detailed 
story  of  the  negotiations  belongs  to  the  history  of  Germany ;  but  the 
discussions  which  took  place  are  of  interest  to  us  as  showing  the  extent 
of  the  reconstruction  of  the  Church  system  to  which  the  most  liberal 
of  the  Catholic  reformers  were  prepared  to  consent.  Agreement  was 
arrived  at  on  the  fundamental  articles  of  Original  Sin,  Free  Will, 
and  Justification.  With  regard  to  the  last,  a  neutral  formula  was 
arrived  at  midway  between  the  Lutheran  doctrine  and  that  formulated 
later  at  Trent.  Justification  was  two-fold,  and  depended  both  on 
"  inherent  "  and  on  "  imputed  "  righteousness.  It  was  attained  by  faith  ; 
but  that  faith  must  be  living  and  active.  The  marriage  of  priests  might 
be  permitted  but  not  encouraged,  as  also  communion  in  both  kinds. 
On  the  general  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  and  especially  on  the  doctrine 
of  the  Eucharist,  agreement  was  found  more  difficult;  and  when  the 
papal  prerogatives  came  on  for  discussion  a  clear  divergence  of  opinion 
showed  itself.  It  was  clear  that,  after  concessions  on  both  sides,  a 
considerable  gulf  still  remained  between  them.  Moreover,  even  if  the 
peacemakers  could  come  to  terms,  there  were  still  Luther  and  the  Pope 
to  reckon  with.  Luther  was  suspicious,  even  unduly  suspicious,  of  all 
papal  advances ;  and  he  refused  to  lielieve  in  the  sincerity  of  proposals 
in  which  his  old  adversary  Eck  had  a  share.  The  Pope,  on  the  other 
hand,  unhesitatingly  rejected  any  ambiguous  definition  of  the  papal 
prerogative  and  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments ;  and  the  agreement 
on  Justification  was  viewed  with  suspicion  in  Rome,  and  only  tolerated 


646  Failure  of  the  Colloquy  [l54i 

after  much  explanation.  It  was  clear  that  no  final  settlement  could  be 
carried  at  the  conference,  which  was  accordingly  brought  to  an  end  by 
the  Emperor  at  the  beginning  of  June,  1541. 

Something  at  any  rate  had  been  gained,  and  the  beginnings  of  a 
peaceful  solution  had  been  made.  That  complete  success  should  have 
been  attained  at  Ratisbon  was  probably  impossible  from  the  first.  The 
exigencies  of  the  political  situation  at  the  time  made  it  the  interest 
of  the  enemies  of  Charles  to  prevent  a  settlement  of  the  religious 
difficulties,  which  it  was  feared  would  strengthen  his  hands.  Moreover 
it  was  clear  that  the  Catholic  reformers  were  no  longer  as  united  as 
they  had  been ;  and  their  influence  over  the  Pope  was  evidently  lessen- 
ing. Caraffa  was  drifting  apart  from  his  colleagues,  and  was  rapidly 
becoming  the  leader  of  a  party  whose  spirit  was  very  different  from 
that  of  the  gracious  idealists  with  whom  he  had  been  associated.  The 
future  of  Catholicism  lay  in  the  balance ;  and  the  next  few  years  would 
determine  for  centuries  the  attitude  of  the  Roman  Church  towards  the 
modern  world,  its  politics,  and  its  thought.  It  may  be  that  when  the 
Colloquy  of  Ratisbon  took  place  it  was  already  too  late  to  save  the  unity 
of  the  Church  in  Germany.  But  to  contemporaries  even  that  did  not 
seem  quite  hopeless.  It  was  difficult  for  men  living  in  the  midst  of  the 
drama  to  realise  how  far  the  world  had  moved  from  its  old  orbit  and  how 
few  of  the  old  landmarks  remained.  To  declare  dogmatically,  however, 
that  the  attempt  at  compromise  made  at  Ratisbon  was  doomed  to  failure 
from  the  first  is  to  assume  that  Protestantism  and  Catholicism  had 
already  taken  up  the  definite  positions  which  they  reached  at  the  end 
of  the  century.  In  the  case  of  Catholicism,  however,  it  was  only  after 
a  struggle,  the  issue  of  which  was  long  doubtful,  that  its  attitude  was 
definitely  determined. 

The  revival  of  religious  life  combined  with  a  strict  adherence  to  the 
old  scholastic  dogma  —  the  feeling,  as  Carnesecchi  put  it,  that  men  had 
the  Catholic  religion,  and  only  desired  that  it  should  be  better  preached  — 
revealed  itself  first  in  an  awakening  of  the  old  religious  Orders  and  the 
formation  of  others  to  meet  new  needs.  The  numerous  exemptions  from 
episcopal  jurisdiction  possessed  by  the  old  Orders  had  given  rise  to  many 
grave  abuses,  and  contributed  to  the  slackening  of  their  spiritual  life. 
Spain,  the  home  of  religious  orthodoxy  united  with  religious  zeal,  led 
the  wa}"  in  reform.  The  achievement  of  national  unity  at  the  end  of 
the  fifteenth  century  brought  with  it  a  revival  of  the  Spanish  Church. 
The  State  used  the  Church  for  its  own  purposes,  and  the  royal  authority 
became  all  powerful.  The  Spanish  hierarchy,  though  always  fervently 
Catholic,  was  never  ultramontane.  Papal  interference  was  carefully 
limited ;  and,  with  the  aid  of  the  revived  Inquisition,  Ximenes  reformed 
the  Spanish  Church.  The  religious  Orders  were  brought  under  control ; 
and  the  morals  of  the  Spanish  clergy  soon  compared  favourably  with  those 


1504-28]  TJie  monastic  Orders  and  reform  647 

of  the  rest  of  Chrrstendora.  A  revival  of  Scholasticism  in  its  Thomist 
form  took  place,  of  which  the  great  Dominican  Melchior  Cano  became 
later  the  chief  exponent.  Stress  was  laid  upon  the  divine  right  of  the 
episcopate.  Bishops  were  not  merely  curates  of  the  Pope.  The  nobler 
sides  of  medieval  Christianity  were  again  displayed  to  the  world  by  the 
Spanish  Churcli.  The  darker  side,  the  horrors  of  the  Inquisition,  the 
intellectual  intolerance  and  narrow  outlook  on  life,  the  delicient  sense  of 
human  freedom  and  the  rights  of  conscience,  were  there  also  ;  but  in  a 
narrower  sphere  the  seeds  were  being  sown  of  one  of  the  greatest 
religious  revivals  the  world  has  seen.  The  line  which  events  took  in 
Spain  could  not  fail  in  time  to  react  upon  the  Catliolic  reform  movement 
in  Italy  ;  and  that  reaction  became  more  and  more  powerful.  The 
inspiration  of  the  movement  in  Italy  was  at  first  indigenous  ;  but  in 
time  the  gloomy  fanaticism  of  Spain  overshadowed  it  and  crushed  out 
its  more  humane  elements. 

But  in  its  beginnings  the  movement  was  a  spontaneous  expression  of 
the  single  desire  to  make  the  Catholic  religion  once  more  a  reality.  With 
many  it  took  the  form  of  a  restoration  of  the  primitive  austerity  of  the 
older  Orders.  Gregorio  Cortese  recalled  to  its  ideal  the  Italian  Benedictine 
Congregation,  reorganised  in  1504,  and  impressed  upon  it  its  duty  of 
supporting  the  Church  by  its  learning.  The  Camaldolese,  an  offshoot 
of  the  Benedictines  founded  by  St  Romuald  in  the  eleventh  century,  were 
reformed  by  Paolo  Giustiniani,  a  member  of  a  noble  Venetian  family. 
Anumberof  thesemonksunderhisdirectionledan  ascetic  lifeat  Massaccio, 
between  Ancona  and  Camerino.  After  his  death  in  1528  Monte  Corone 
became  the  centre  of  the  new  Congregation;  and  the  Order  spread  rapidly 
throughout  Southern  Europe.  The  old  monastic  Orders,  however,  only 
set  an  example  which,  powerful  for  good  though  it  was,  went  but  a 
little  way  in  restoring  Catholicism  among  the  people.  It  was  reserved 
for  the  Franciscans  and  for  new  religious  societies  to  bring  about  a 
revival  of  popular  religion.  In  1526  Matteo  de'  Bassi  was  authorised 
by  Clement  VII  to  found  a  reformed  branch  of  Franciscans,  pledged  to 
revive  the  simple  rule  of  their  founder.  They  came  to  be  known  as 
Capuchins  from  their  garb.  Simple  and  superstitious,  they  appealed  to 
the  populace  ;  and  they  became  the  spiritual  guides  and  counsellors  of 
the  people.  Religion  was  vulgarised  in  their  hands,  and  their  influence 
was  not  altogether  for  good.  Some  of  them  embraced  Protestant  ideas  ; 
and  for  a  time  the  Order  was  viewed  with  some  suspicion.  But  to 
the  Capuchins  more  than  perhaps  to  any  other  organisation  does  the 
Roman  Church  owe  the  preservation  of  the  mass  of  the  Italian  people 
in  her  fold. 

The  older  Orders  of  monks  and  friars  were,  however,  unequal  by 
themselves  to  achieving  the  regeneration  of  Catholicism.  The  secu- 
lar clergy  in  many  parts  had  fallen  into  a  lower  state  of  degradation 
than  the  regulars ;  and  it  was  one  of  the  chief  concerns  of  the  Oratory  of 


6-18  The  Theatine  Order  [1524-30 

Divine  Love  to  bring  the  parish  priests  to  a  sense  of  their  high  calling. 
Two  of  the  members  of  the  Oratory,  Gaetano  da  Thiene  and  Giovanni 
Pietro  Caraffa,  took  the  first  active  steps  to  effect  this  reformation. 
Gaetano  da  Thiene,  of  an  ancient  family  of  Vicenza,  was  one  of  the 
pronotari  participmiti  at  the  papal  Court  under  Julius  II.  The  life, 
however,  became  distasteful  to  him,  and  he  accordingly  resigned  his 
jDost  and  took  orders.  He  was  one  of  the  earliest  members  of  the  Ora- 
tory. After  a  short  time  he  left  Rome  and  worked  in  Vicenza  and 
Venice,  preaching  to  the  people  and  doing  good  works.  His  experience 
there  taught  him  that  the  weakness  of  the  Church  was  largely  due  to 
the  inefficiency  and  corruption  of  the  parochial  clergy.  Accordingly,  in 
1523,  he  returned  to  Rome  with  the  idea  of  founding  a  society  to  remedy 
this  evil.  There  he  again  met  Caraffa,  who  at  once  fell  in  with  his  views ; 
and  the  two  worked  together  to  achieve  this  end.  The  Canons  Regular 
of  St  Augustine  may  have  suggested  to  Gaetano  da  Thiene  the  Order 
which  they  obtained  the  permission  of  Clement  VII  to  found  in  1524. 

The  new  society  was  to  consist  of  ordinary  secular  clergy  bound 
together  by  the  three  monastic  vows.  They  were  to  be,  in  short,  secular 
priests  with  the  vows  of  monks.  The  reformation  of  the  clergy  and  a 
life  of  contemplation  were  to  be  the  objects  of  the  society. 

The  new  society  is  important,  not  so  much  on  account  of  its  own 
work  among  the  secular  clergy  as  for  the  example  it  set.  It  always 
remained  small  in  numbers,  and  its  membership  came  to  be  confined  to 
the  nobility.  Though  the  original  conception  was  due  to  Gaetano  da 
Thiene,  yet  it  was  from  Caraffa  that  the  society  took  its  name.  It 
became  known  as  the  Order  of  Theatines  after  his  see  of  Chieti  (Theate). 
It  was  no  doubt  largely  due  to  his  administrative  abilit}^  and  power  of 
organisation  that  the  society  was  a  success.  It  found  many  imitators. 
A  similar  society  of  regular  clerks  was  founded  at  Somasca  in  the 
Milanese,  1528,  by  Girolamo  Miani,  son  of  a  Venetian  senator  ;  and 
at  Milan  the  order  of  Barnabites  was  established  about  1530  by  three 
noble  ecclesiastics,  Zaccaria,  Ferrari,  and  Morigia.  The  Barnabites 
were  extremely  successful  in  their  labours  ;  and  their  society  carried 
into  practice  far  and  wide  the  scheme  which  Gaetano  da  Thiene 
had  been  the  first  to  conceive  for  the  improvement  of  the  secular 
clergy. 

Quietly  and  unostentatiously,  with  little  active  assistance  from  the 
papal  Court,  the  regeneration  of  Catholicism  in  Italy  was  thus  begun. 
Caraffa  was  the  guiding  genius  in  the  work,  so  far  as  a  movement  which 
was  so  wide  can  be  connected  with  a  single  man  ;  and  it  was  pregnant 
with  importance  for  the  future  that  he  was  growing  more  and  more 
estranged  from  the  liberal  Catholic  reformers,  with  whom  he  had 
at  one  time  worked  in  the  Oratory  of  Divine  Love.  The  path  w^hich 
Contarini  and  his  friends  were  indicating,  greater  freedom  in  discipline, 
reduction  of  papal  prerogative,  and  a  considerable  restatement  of  the 


1541-2]  Earlij  history  of  the  Inquisition  649 

traditional  dogma,  meant  a  break  with  the  past  which,  when  its  full 
import  dawned  upon  them,  shocked  Caraffa  and  tliose  who  clung  to 
medieval  Christianity.  The  Ratisbon  proposals  of  loll  opened  their 
eyes,  and  the  parting  of  the  ways  came.  The  group  of  Catholic  reformers 
split  in  two ;  and  the  division  paralysed  for  a  time  the  work  which  had 
been  begun  with  the  Consilium  de  emendanda  ecclesia.  Until  it  was  clear 
that  a  reform  of  morals  would  not  entail  any  surrender  of  medieval 
theology  and  of  the  medieval  system  of  Church  government,  Caraffa  and 
his  friends  made  impossible  any  general  scheme  of  reform.  The  new 
Orders,  the  Theatines,  the  Barnabites,  and  the  Capuchins,  were  restoring 
Catliolicism  rapidly  on  the  old  lines.  Their  work  went  steadily  on,  and 
meanwhile  it  was  enough  to  wait.  They  were  doing  the  work  as  Caraffa, 
and  not  as  Contarini,  wanted  it  to  be  done.  The  progress  made,  liowever, 
was  not  as  rapid  as  might  have  been  wished,  until  two  agencies  appeared 
upon  the  scene  which  became  the  most  potent  of  the  forces  that  re- 
generated Catholicism,  and  breathed  into  it  a  militant  spirit,  making 
all  conciliation  impossible.  The  Inquisition  —  the  Holy  Office  for  tlie 
Universal  Church  —  and  the  Society  of  Jesus  were  the  new  organisations 
which  achieved  the  work. 

The  Inquisition  which  was  set  up  in  Rome  in  1542  by  the  Bull 
Licet  initio  was  not  new,  but  the  adaptation  of  an  old  organisation 
to  the  changed  conditions  of  the  times.  The  tendency  to  jjersecute 
appeared  in  the  Church  in  very  early  days,  but  its  lawfulness  was  always 
challenged';  and  it  was  not  until  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries  that 
any  deliberate  attempt  was  made  to  persecute  systematically.  A  wave 
of  heresy  then  passed  over  western  Europe.  Dualism  and  Manichaeism, 
always  prevalent  in  the  East,  obtained  a  firm  footing  in  the  West ;  and 
the  south  of  France  became  their  stronghold.  The  Church  became 
alarmed  at  the  spread  of  ideas  which  not  only  were  subversive  of 
Christian  faith  but  threatened  the  foundations  of  society  and  morals. 
The  crusading  spirit  was  diverted  from  the  infidel  to  the  heretic.  The 
Albigensian  crusade  achieved  its  purpose.  But  something  more  was 
needed  than  an  occasional  holy  war  upon  heresy.  The  work  was  taken 
in  hand  at  first  by  the  new  episcopal  Courts,  which  were  beginning 
to  administer  the  recently  codified  Canon  Law  in  every  diocese.  But 
tlieir  action  Avas  spasmodic  ;  and  in  the  thirteentli  century  their  efforts 
were  reinforced  by  a  papal  Inquisition  entrusted  to  the  Dominican  and 
Franciscan  Orders.  It  was  regulated  by  the  papal  Legates  and  its 
authority  was  enforced  by  provincial  Councils.  Tlie  Papacy  however 
never  had  complete  control  of  it  ;  and  side  by  side  with  it  the  old 
episcopal  Inquisition  went  on.  The  episcopate  viewed  the  pa])al  Inqui- 
sition with  jealousy,  and  in  the  fourteenth  century  succeeded  to  some 
extent  in  limiting  its  powers.  In  the  fifteenth  century  its  work  was 
done  and  its  activity  ceased.     It  had  stamped  out  heresy  in  Central 


650         The  Inquisition  in  Sjxdn,  and  at  Rome     [1477-1542 

Europe  at  an  awful  expenditure  of  human  life  and  at  the  cost  of  a 
complete  perversion  of  the  spirit  of  Christianity. 

At  the  moment  however  when  it  was  about  to  disappear  Spain 
asked  for  its  introduction  into  that  countr}-.  The  problem  of  the  Moors 
and  the  Jews  prompted  the  request ;  and  on  November  1, 1477,  Sixtus  IV 
authorised  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  to  set  up  the  Inquisition  in  their 
States.  The  Papacy  consented  with  reluctance  ;  and  both  Sixtus  IV  and 
Innocent  VIII  reserved  a  right  of  appeal  to  the  Holy  See.  But  they 
were  both  obliged  to  give  way ;  and  by  a  brief  of  August  23,  1497, 
Alexander  VI  finally  abandoned  the  claim. 

The  Spanish  Inquisition  thus,  though  founded  by  Rome,  did  not 
remain  under  its  direct  control.  The  Spanish  monarchy  was  responsible 
for  it  and  used  it  as  an  instrument  of  State,  though  at  times  the  terrific 
engine  which  it  had  created  got  beyond  its  control.  The  thoroughness 
with  which  Torquemada  did  his  work  achieved  its  object ;  and  when 
Ximenes  became  Chief  Inquisitor  in  1507  the  fierceness  of  persecution 
to  some  extent  relaxed.  It  was  this  third  or  Spanish  form  of  the  Inqui- 
sition the  success  of  which  suggested  to  Caraffa  the  setting  up  of  an 
Inquisition  in  Rome  to  supervise  the  whole  Church.  The  idea  was 
warmly  supported  by  Ignatius  Loyola ;  and  accordingly  Paul  III,  by  a 
Bull  of  July  21,  1542,  set  up  the  Holy  Office  of  the  Universal  Church. 
Six  Cardinals  were  appointed  commissioners,  and  were  given  powers  as 
Inquisitors  in  matters  of  faith  on  both  sides  of  the  Alps.  The  Papacy 
thus  provided  itself  with  a  centralised  machiner}^,  which  enabled  it  to 
supervise  the  measures  taken  for  checking  the  spread  of  the  new  opinions. 
Pius  IV  and  Pius  V  extended  the  powers  of  the  Inquisition,  and  its 
organisation  reached  its  most  developed  form  under  Sixtus  V,  who 
by  the  Bull  Immensa  remodelled  it  along  with  the  other  Roman  con- 
gregations. The  number  of  Cardinals  composing  it  was  increased  to 
twelve ;  and  there  were  in  addition  a  Commissar}',  an  Assessor,  and  a 
body  of  Consultors,  who  were  chosen  from  among  canonists  and  theo- 
logians. Besides  these  officials,  there  were  numerous  Qualificators  who 
gave  their  opinion  on  questions  submitted  to  them.  There  were  also 
an  advocate  charged  with  the  defence  of  accused  persons,  and  other 
subordinates.  The  Roman  Inquisition  not  only  proceeded  against  any 
persons  directly  delated  to  it,  but  also  heard  appeals  from  the  sentences 
of  Courts  of  the  Inquisition  in  other  localities.  Inquisitors  were  in 
addition  sent  by  it  to  any  place  where  they  appeared  to  be  needed. 

Though  the  sphere  of  active  work  of  the  Roman  Inquisition  was 
confined  to  Italy,  it  acliieved  the  purpose,  not  only  of  stamping  out 
Protestantism  in  the  peninsula,  but  of  bringing  back  the  old  intolerant 
spirit  into  the  government  of  the  Church.  Conciliation  and  confessions 
of  failure  could  not  go  hand  in  hand  with  the  Inquisition.  The  failure  of 
Contarini  at  Ratisbon  in  1541,  followed  by  the  establishment  of  the  Inqui- 
sition in  1542,  marks  the  active  besrinninsf  of  the  Counter-Reformation 


1521-3]  If/natins  Loyola  651 

in  its  narrower  sense.  A  restoration  of  Catholicism  by  violence  and 
irresistible  force  was  beginning,  which  was  driving  the  party  of  con- 
ciliation from  the  field  and  rendering  all  their  endeavours  useless. 
The  proposals  of  the  peacemakers  were  belied  by  the  actions  of  the 
Inquisition. 

The  Society  of  Jesus  was  the  second  of  the  two  great  organisations 
which  rose  up  to  save  the  tottering  Church.  What  the  papal  Inquisition 
did  for  Italy  the  Society  of  Jesus  did  for  the  Catholic  Church  throughout 
the  world.  Where  force  could  not  be  used,  persuasion  and  the  subtler 
forms  of  influence  were  possible ;  and  in  the  Society  of  Jesus  the  most 
powerful  missionary  organisation  the  world  has  ever  seen  was  placed  at 
the  disposal  of  the  Papacy.  With  rapidity  little  short  of  marvellous  the 
Society  spread  not  only  throughout  Europe  but  to  China  and  the  Indies, 
and  became  one  of  the  chief  powers  in  the  counsels  of  the  Church. 
Jesuit  Fathers  moulded  to  a  considerable  extent  the  dogmatic  decrees  at 
Trent.  The  emergence  of  the  Papacy  from  the  ordeal  of  the  Council, 
with  its  prerogative  increased  rather  than  diminished,  was  largely  due 
to  their  efforts. 

Don  Inigo  Lopez  de  Recalde,  their  founder,  was  born  in  1491  at  the 
castle  of  Loyola  in  Guipuzcoa.  He  served  as  a  page  at  the  Court  of 
Ferdinand  of  Aragon,  and  his  youth  and  early  manhood  were  devoted 
to  the  profession  of  arms.  A  severe  wound  which  he  received  at  the 
siege  of  Pampeluna  in  1521  lamed  him  for  life.  During  a  long  and 
painful  period  of  convalescence  there  fell  into  his  hands  several  books 
dealing  with  the  life  of  Christ  and  the  heroic  deeds  of  the  Saints.  So 
deep  an  impression  was  made  upon  his  mind  that  he  determined  to  devote 
himself  entirely  to  the  service  of  God  and  transfer  his  allegiance  from 
an  earthly  to  a  heavenly  army.  Restored  to  health  early  in  1522,  he  set 
out  as  a  knight  errant  of  Christ  and  the  Virgin.  AVe  hear  of  him  first 
at  Montserrat  at  a  shrine  of  the  Virgin  famous  throughout  Spain.  But 
liis  stay  here  was  short,  and  we  next  find  him  at  Manresa  not  far  from 
Montserrat.  At  Manresa,  according  to  the  traditional  story,  Ignatius 
had  his  celebrated  vision  lasting  for  eight  days,  in  which  the  plan  of 
his  society  was  revealed  to  him  and  the  method  which  he  worked  out  in 
his  Spiritual  Exercises.  There  is  reason  to  believe,  however,  that  the 
evolution  of  his  great  idea  was  a  very  gradual  process,  and  that  he  owed 
more  to  others  than  his  disciples  have  been  usually  willing  to  admit. 
At  any  rate  we  know  for  certain  that  he  left  Alanresa  early  in  1523  as  a 
pilgrim  for  the  Holy  Land.  He  had  already  conceived  the  idea  of 
founding  a  great  society  for  the  service  of  the  Church.  But  its  exact 
nature  was  not  yet  at  all  clear  in  his  mind.  Ignatius  had  little  know- 
ledge of  the  great  world  and  its  needs.  To  a  Spaniard  war  with  the 
infidel  was  an  obvious  idea  ;  and  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  reconcjuest 
of  Jerusalem  should  occur  to  him  at  the  first  as  the  most  laudable  object 


652  Foundation  of  the  Society  of  Jesus  [i524-37 

for  his  society.  His  stay  at  Jerusalem  was  not,  however,  very  successful. 
A  reckless  enthusiast  might  cause  trouble  amidst  a  Mohammedan  popu- 
lation ;  and  Ignatius  was  refused  permission  to  remain  in  Jerusalem  and 
returned  to  Venice  in  1524. 

But  the  long  journey  had  left  its  mark  on  his  mind.  He  perceived 
his  ignorance  of  the  world  and  his  lack  of  education,  and  he  determined 
to  do  his  best  to  remedy  these  defects.  From  1624  to  1528  he  studied  at 
the  Universities  of  Barcelona,  Alcala,  and  Salamanca  ;  and  in  1528  he 
proceeded  to  the  University  of  Paris.  It  has  been  suggested  that  fear 
of  the  Inquisition  prompted  him  to  this  step ;  for  twice,  once  at  Alcala 
and  once  at  Salamanca,  he  had  fallen  under  its  suspicion  and  narrowly 
escaped  condemnation.  At  Paris  Ignatius  proceeded  more  cautiously; 
and  the  seven  years  of  his  stay  there  mark  the  crisis  of  his  life  when  the 
visionary  and  enthusiast  developed  into  an  organiser  and  leader  of 
men.  Patiently  and  quietly,  accepting  no  rebuff,  he  gathered  round  him 
one  by  one  a  little  baud  whom  he  had  infected  with  his  enthusiasm. 
Pierre  Lefevre,  a  Savoyard,  was  his  first  disciple.  Through  him  he 
obtained  an  influence  over  Francis  Xavier,  the  future  Apostle  of  the 
Indies,  though  he  was  no  easy  conquest.  Diego  (Jacobus)  Laynez  and 
Alfonso  Salraeron,  both  Spaniards,  were  the  next  converts ;  and 
Nicholas  Bobadilla  and  Simon  Rodriguez  soon  followed.  On  August  15, 
1534,  the  seven  of  them  heard  mass  and  received  the  communion  in  the 
church  at  Montmartre  and  made  a  vow  of  poverty  and  chastity.  They 
also  solemnly  bound  themselves  to  go  to  Jerusalem  for  the  glory  of  God 
when  they  had  finished  their  courses  at  the  University ;  but,  if  it  was 
found  impossible  to  do  so  within  a  year,  they  agreed  to  throw  themselves 
at  the  feet  of  the  Holy  Father  and  place  themselves  absolutely  at  his 
disposal. 

Accordingly  in  1537  they  left  Paris  and  went  to  Venice  with  the 
object  of  reaching  the  Holy  Land.  On  the  eve  of  their  leaving  Paris 
Lefevre  had  gained  three  fresh  recruits,  Claude  le  Jay,  Jean  Codure,  and 
Pasquier-Brouet ;  when  Ignatius,  who  had  meanwhile  visited  Spain, 
rejoined  his  companions,  the  little  band  had  thus  increased  to  ten. 
They,  however,  found  it  impossible  to  proceed  to  Jerusalem  in  conse- 
quence of  the  war  with  the  Turks,  and  therefore,  in  accordance  with 
their  vow,  determined  to  offer  their  services  to  the  Pope.  It  was  at 
Venice  that  Caraffa  and  Ignatius  met,  and  it  is  probable  that  it  was 
Caraffa's  influence  which  brought  home  to  Ignatius  that  there  was  more 
important  work  for  him  and  his  disciples  nearer  home.  The  infidel  was 
at  the  time  less  of  a  danger  to  the  Church  than  the  heretic  ;  and,  just  as 
in  the  middle  ages  the  transition  from  a  crusade  against  the  one  to  a 
crusade  against  the  other  was  easy,  so  now  it  was  not  difficult  to  persuade 
Ignatius  that  his  true  mission  was  the  extirpation  of  Protestantism  and 
the  expulsion  of  half-hearted  brethren. 

Caraffa  would  have  wished    Ignatius  and    his    disciples    to   unite 


1537-40]  Confirmation  by  Pope  Paul  III  653 

themselves  to  his  favourite  Order  of  Theatines,  but  to  this  Ignatius 
would  in  no  way  consent.  lie  felt  his  own  peculiar  mission  vividly,  and 
what  were  to  be  the  characteristic  features  of  his  Institute  were  rapidly 
taking  shape  in  his  mind.  Though  displeased  by  the  refusal  of  Ignatius 
to  conform  to  his  wishes,  Caraffa  none  the  less  gave  him  every  encourage- 
ment. Caraffa's  later  dislike  of  the  Society  when  he  was  Pope  was  due 
to  deeper  causes  than  Ignatius'  refusal  to  throw  in  his  lot  with  him. 
The  diplomatic  skill  which  had  marked  Ignatius  ever  since  he  left  Spain 
in  1528  displayed  itself  in  the  caution  with  which  he  approached  the 
Holy  See.  Accompanied  by  Lefevre  and  Laynez,  he  determined  to  visit 
Rome,  leaving  his  other  companions  to  carry  on  in  northern  Italy  the 
work  of  preaching  and  teaching  and  the  gathering  of  fresh  disci})les, 
which  they  had  begun  in  Venice.  He  felt  it  was  necessary  to  survey  the 
ground  at  Rome  before  attempting  to  settle  there.  On  his  journey 
Ignatius  had  a  vision  in  a  little  church  not  far  from  Rome,  which  shows 
that  the  worldly  wisdom  which  he  had  acquired  had  not  dimmed  his 
sense  of  a  divine  mission.  God  appeared  to  him  in  this  wayside 
sanctuary,  and  he  heard  a  voice  saying,  "  Ego  vohis  Romae  propitius  ero."" 

It  was  October,  1539,  when  the  three  enthusiasts  reached  Rome. 
Reform  was  in  the  air  ;  and,  though,  as  we  have  seen,  little  was  done  to 
carry  out  the  suggestions  of  the  Consilium  de  emendanda  ecclesia,  yet 
Paul  III  was  ready  to  give  every  encouragement  to  any  scheme  for  the 
improvement  of  the  Church  which  did  not  call  for  any  great  self-denial 
on  the  part  of  the  Papacy  itself.  Ignatius  and  his  companions  were 
accordingly  favourably  received  and  authorised  to  preach  a  reform  of 
manners  in  Rome.  The  door  thus  being  opened,  Ignatius  felt  that  the 
time  had  come  to  summon  his  other  disciples  to  join  him.  At  Easter, 
1538,  the  little  band  were  again  united  ;  and  the  work  which  they  had 
begun  in  northern  Italy  was  extended  to  Rome.  Contarini,  as  well 
as  Caraffa,  welcomed  new  allies  and  became  their  protector.  It  only 
remained  for  Ignatius  and  his  friends  to  draw  up  a  definite  Rule  and  to 
obtain  confirmation  from  the  Pope. 

A  supplication  was  accordingly  drawn  up  indicating  the  objects  and 
constitution  of  their  proposed  Society.  Their  petition  was  referred  to  a 
committee  of  three  Cardinals,  with  Guidiccioni  at  its  head,  who  at  first 
reported  unfavourably  on  the  scheme.  The  needs  of  the  day  required 
the  reform  or  suppression  of  existing  religious  Orders  rather  than  the 
creation  of  new.  Ignatius  was  however  not  discouraged.  He  worked 
on  ;  and  at  length  on  Septeml)er  27, 1540,  the  opposition  was  overcome, 
and  by  the  Bull  Regimini  militantis  ecclesiae  the  Society  of  Jesus  was 
founded.  The  Bull  contained  a  recitation  of  the  petition  of  Ignatius 
and  his  companions;  and  it  is  the  only  certain  authority  in  our  posses- 
sion from  which  we  can  learn  the  nature  of  his  plan  in  its  early  form. 
The  first  thing  which  strikes  the  reader  is  that,  wliile  the  objects  of  the 
Society  are  clearly  indicated,  its  constitution  is  only  vaguely  outlined. 


654:  The  Constitution  of  the  Society  [l540-l 

Its  members  are  to  bear  arms  in  the  service  of  Christ  and  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff,  His  Vicar,  to  whom  they  are  to  take  a  special  vow  of  obedience. 
They  are  to  be  the  militia  of  the  Holy  See,  devoting  themselves  to  its 
service  whenever  it  may  direct.  As  preachers  and  directors  of  consciences 
they  are  to  work  for  the  propagation  of  the  faith,  and  above  all  by 
means  of  the  education  of  the  young.  They  are  to  take  the  vows  of 
poverty  and  chastity,  and  obedience  to  the  General  whom  they  set  over 
themselves,  in  all  things  which  concern  the  observance  of  their  Rule. 

The  power  granted  to  the  General  is  unprecedented  in  its  extent. 
The  right  of  command  belongs  to  him  entirely.  He  is  to  decide  for 
each  his  vocation  and  define  his  work.  This  is  the  only  indication  in 
the  Bull  of  the  elaborate  hierarchy  of  degrees  which  appears  in  the  later 
constitution  of  the  Society.  At  the  same  time  this  apparently  absolute 
power  granted  to  the  General  is  limited  by  the  fact  that  in  certain  cases 
he  is  to  take  the  advice  of  his  council,  which  is  to  consist,  in  important 
matters,  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Society,  while  in  affairs  of  less 
moment  those  members  who  happen  to  be  in  his  immediate  neighbour- 
hood alone  need  be  consulted.  Here,  and  in  the  insistence  on  a  period 
of  probation  before  admission  to  the  Society,  there  is  an  apparent 
approximation  to  the  constitutions  of  the  older  religious  Orders,  in 
which,  however  much  stress  might  be  laid  on  the  duty  of  obedience  to 
authority,  that  authority  was  alwaj^s  bound  to  act  in  a  canonical  and 
constitutional  way.  If  then  the  scheme  laid  before  Paul  III  contained 
the  germ  from,  which  the  matured  constitution  of  the  Society  was  to 
grow,  yet  there  were  also  present  in  it  elements  which  disguised  the 
extent  to  which  the  Societ}^  was  a  new  departure.  The  language  of 
Ignatius'  petition  is  not  inconsistent  in  its  main  features  with  the  future 
constitution  of  the  Society,  but  it  did  not  necessarily  imply  it.  The 
unique  nature  of  the  new  organisation  was  not  fully  realised  by  the 
officials  of  the  Roman  Court.  The  limitation  of  the  number  of  members 
to  sixty,  which  was  inserted  in  the  Bull,  may  however  show  that  they 
did  not  intend  it  to  grow  to  unmanageable  size  until  its  tendencies 
revealed  themselves  more  clearly. 

On  April  4, 1541,  six  out  of  the  original  ten  members  of  the  Society, 
who  were  then  in  Rome  —  Ignatius,  Laynez,  Salmeron,  Le  Jay,  Pasquier- 
Brouet,  and  Codure  — met  to  elect  their  General.  The  four  who  were 
absent  with  the  exception  of  Bobadilla  had  sent  their  votes  in  writing. 
Ignatius  was  unanimously  elected.  He,  however,  refused  the  honour  ; 
but  he  was  again  elected  on  April  7.  At  last  on  April  17  he  gave  way  ; 
and  on  April  22  he  received  the  vows  of  his  companions  at  the  church 
of  San  Paolo  fuori  le  mura.  Thus  began  the  generalate  of  Ignatius, 
which  lasted  until  his  death  on  July  31,  1556.  The  fame  of  the  new 
Order  soon  spread  throughout  the  Catholic  world,  and  many  fresh 
members  were  admitted  to  its  ranks.  A  second  Bull  (Injunctum  nobis') 
was  obtained  from  Paul  III,  dated  March  14,  1543,  which  repealed  the 


1541-56]  TJie  General  and  the  Society  655 

clause  of  the  former  Bull  limiting  the  number  of  members  to  sixty. 
Meanwhile  Ignatius  continued  to  work  at  the  Constitutions  ;  and 
the  experience  which  he  gained  during  the  first  years  of  the  Society's 
existence  no  doubt  unconsciously  modified  his  scheme  for  its  government. 
The  great  increase  in  the  number  of  members— an  increase  which  he 
himself  did  not  altogether  welcome  —  with  the  consequent  mixture  of 
heterogeneous  elements  in  the  Society,  made  it  advisable  to  strengthen 
the  authority  of  the  General  and  to  weaken  still  further  those  checks 
on  his  power  which  appear  in  the  petition  of  1540.  In  no  other  way 
could  the  unity  of  action  of  the  Society  be  preserved.  Judging  from 
the  part  played  after  the  death  of  Ignatius  by  Laynez,  it  is  extremely 
probable  that  this  development  was  largely  due  to  his  influence. 

However  this  may  be,  the  change  undoubtedly  took  place  ;  and  by  a 
Bull  of  Paul  III  of  October  18,  1549  {Licet  debitum  pastoralis  officii), 
and  by  a  Bull  of  Julius  III  of  July  21,  1550  {Exposcit  pastoralis  officii), 
the  power  of  the  General's  Council  was  still  further  limited  and  other 
changes  were  made  in  the  original  plan.  It  is  clear  from  the  language 
of  both  these  Bulls  that,  though  further  drafts  of  the  Constitutions  had 
been  laid  before  the  Papal  authorities,  Ignatius  had  not  yet  reduced 
them  to  their  final  form.  From  the  Bull  of  Julius  III  it  is  evident  that 
the  system  of  a  series  of  degrees  in  the  Society  was  already  shaping 
itself,  but  that  the  government  of  the  Society  had  not  yet  become  the 
system  of  absolutism  it  afterwards  became. 

Julius  III  (1550-5)  was  kindly  disposed  towards  Ignatius  ;  and 
during  his  pontificate  the  Collegium  Romanum  and  the  Collegium 
G-ermanicum  were  set  up  in  Rome,  to  both  of  which  he  granted  an 
annual  subsidy.  His  successor  Marcellus  II,  the  Cardinal  of  Santa 
Croce,  had  been  one  of  the  Legates  at  Trent.  It  was  due  to  his 
influence  that  Laynez  and  Salmeron  were  present  at  the  Council  as  the 
theologians  of  the  Pope.  With  iNIarcellus  the  Counter-Reformation 
ascended  the  papal  throne  ;  and  the  Jesuits  appeared  about  to  become 
the  predominant  influence  in  the  Roman  Court.  But  he  died  three 
weeks  after  his  election,  and  was  succeeded  by  Caraffa,  who  took  the 
title  of  Paul  IV.  The  new  Pope  immediately  displayed  hostility  to 
the  Order.  A  domiciliary  visit  was  paid  totlie  Gesu  and  a  search  made 
for  arms.  Paul's  hostility  to  Spain  made  him  suspect  a  body  which 
had  such  close  relations  with  that  country.  He,  however,  employed 
Laynez  in  connexion  with  his  schemes  for  reform  ;  and  it  was  only  after 
the  death  of  Ignatius  that  he  interfered  in  the  internal  affairs  of  the 
Society. 

Laynez  was  elected  Vicar-General  on  August  3,  1550,  to  adiniuistor 
the  affairs  of  the  Society  until  the  Congregation  could  assemble  to  elect 
a  new  General,  and  to  approve  the  Constitutions  which  Ignatius  had  left. 
For  various  reasons  the  meeting  of  the  General  Congregation  seems  to 
have  been  delayed  ;  and  Laynez  spent  the  time  in  preparing  a  final 


656  Lai/nez,  the  Society,  and  Poj^e  Paul  IV       [1556-9 

edition  of  tlie  Institute  for  submission  for  its  approval.  Dissensions 
meanwhile  broke  out  ;  Laynez  was  accused  of  purposely  deferring  the 
meeting  of  the  General  Congregation  in  his  own  interests.  Bobadilla, 
Rodriguez,  and  Pasquier-Brouet  were  the  leaders  of  the  opposition. 
They  appealed  to  the  Pope  against  the  arbitrary  conduct  of  the  Vicar- 
General,  and  requested  that  the  government  of  the  Society  during  the 
interregnum  might  rest  with  the  Council  of  the  Society.  The  Pope 
then  called  upon  Laynez  to  bring  before  him  the  Constitutions  and 
rules  of  the  Society.  Cardinal  Carpi  was  appointed  to  enquire  into 
the  matter.  His  report  recommended  the  confirmation  of  Laynez  as 
Vicar-General,  but  advised  that  in  future  he  should  be  obliged  to 
consult  the  Council.  Lajaiez,  however,  managed  to  obtain  from  the 
Pope  a  second  enquiry,  which  was  conducted  by  Cardinal  Ghislieri, 
the  future  Pius  V.  It  is  not  clear  what  the  exact  result  of  this  second 
enquiry  was,  but  Laynez  skilfully  managed  to  divide  the  opposition  and 
paralyse  its  efforts.  At  length  on  June  19,  1558,  the  General  Congre- 
gation met  ;  and  July  2  was  appointed  for  the  election  of  the  new 
General.  Twenty  Fathers  were  present.  Cardinal  Pachecho  superin- 
tended the  election  by  order  of  the  Pope,  and  Laynez  was  elected  by 
thirteen  votes  out  of  twenty.  The  assembly  then  proceeded  to  approve 
the  Constitutions  in  the  form  they  were  presented  to  it  by  Laynez. 

Laynez  had  apparently  won  a  great  triumph.  He  had  quelled  the 
opposition  to  his  authority.  He  had  persuaded  the  assembly  to  accept 
the  Latin  version  by  Polanco  of  Ignatius'  Institute,  by  which  the  abso- 
lute power  of  the  General  was  secured.  But  he  had  reckoned  without 
the  Pope.  When  Paul  IV  heard  that  the  General  Congregation  had 
confirmed  the  Constitutions  of  the  Society  without  consulting  him  and 
were  about  to  adjourn,  he  sent  Cardinal  Pachecho  to  demand  the  inser- 
tion of  two  alterations  in  the  Rule.  In  the  first  place,  the  Jesuits  were 
to  be  bound  to  recite  the  offices  of  the  Church  in  choir  as  other  religious 
Orders  were  bound  to  do  ;  and  in  the  second  place,  the  office  of  General 
was  to  be  for  three  years  only  and  not  for  life.  Paul  IV  evidently 
feared  the  power  which  the  Constitutions  of  the  Society  would  give  to 
an  able  man  to  wield  as  he  thought  fit.  The  Society  might  become  an 
imperium  in  imperio.  The  "  black  Pope  "  might  become  a  dangerous 
power  behind  the  throne.  If  we  read  the  story  in  the  light  of  the  later 
history  of  the  Society,  this  is  not  an  improbable  interpretation  of  the 
action  of  Paul  IV. 

Laynez  saw  there  was  nothing  to  do  but  submit.  The  General  Con- 
gregation bowed  to  the  wishes  of  the  Holy  Father  and  dispersed.  The 
two  alterations  of  the  Rule  were  not  incorporated  in  it,  but  are  printed 
as  an  appendix  to  the  edition  published  at  Rome  in  December,  1558. 
Laynez  could  do  nothing  but  wait  for  better  times.  They  were  not  long 
in  coming.  On  August  18,  1559,  Paul  IV  died  and  was  succeeded  by 
Pius  IV,  who  did  not  share  his  predecessor's  dislike  of  the  Order.    Laynez 


The  Spiritual  Exercises  657 


seized  a  favourable  opportunity  of  bringing  before  the  Society  the 
question  whetlier  a  mere  informal  order  of  a  Pope  was  binding  on 
them  ;  but  they  considered  it  better  to  bring  the  matter  directly  before 
Pius  IV,  who  revoked  the  order  of  his  predecessor  so  far  as  that  was 
necessary.  The  Papacy  thus  gave  way  in  its  first  struggle  with  the 
Society  which  was  to  be  so  often  more  a  master  than  a  servant. 

It  has  been  necessary  to  describe  at  consideraljle  length  the  early 
history  of  the  government  of  the  Society,  in  order  to  show  how  gradually 
it  revealed  its  true  nature  to  the  world,  and  that  absolutism  did  not 
triumph  w^ithout  considerable  opposition  in  the  Society  itself.  The 
new  institution,  however,  from  its  very  beginning,  was  the  expression  of 
the  principle  of  blind  obedience  to  authority.  Other  Orders  had  incul- 
cated it  as  a  virtue  ;  but  none  had  provided  so  searching  a  discipline  by 
which  complete  ascendancy  could  be  attained  over  its  disciples.  More- 
over its  purpose  was  not  merely  to  produce  Christian  humility  and  the 
spirit  of  self-denial  in  the  individual.  It  was  to  make  each  member  a 
ready  instrument  for  the  purposes  of  the  Society  in  its  warfare  with  the 
world.  A  practical  object  was  always  the  end  in  view  —  the  triumph  of 
the  Church  over  hostile  forces,  the  conquest  of  the  hosts  of  Satan  what- 
ever form  they  might  assume.  A  perpetual  warfare  was  to  be  waged, 
and  success  could  only  be  obtained  by  faithful  obedience  to  orders. 
The  theory  of  this  discipline  is  developed  in  the  Spiritual  Exercises  of 
St  Ignatius,  a  work  of  genius  in  devotional  literature.  Though  it  owes 
its  form  to  a  considerable  extent  to  the  Exercitatorio  de  la  vida 
espiritual  of  Dom  Garcia  de  Cisneros,  the  Benedictine  Abbot  of  Mont- 
serrat,  published  in  1500,  which  Ignatius  no  doubt  found  in  use  at  the 
convent  at  jNIontserrat  during  his  stay  there,  and  to  the  writings  of 
mystics  such  as  Gerard  Zerbold  of  Zutphen  and  Mauburnus  (Joliannes 
Momboir),  members  of  the  Brotherhood  of  the  Common  Life,  which  he 
probably  met  with  during  his  stay  in  Paris,  yet  it  is  no  mere  compila- 
tion. The  spirit  which  breathes  through  its  pages  differs  from  that 
which  distinguishes  most  mystical  writings,  in  that  the  absorption  of  the 
soul  in  God  is  not  to  be  the  end  of  action  but  the  source  of  inspiration 
for  further  work.  The  moral  paralysis  of  pantheism,  tlie  danger  of  all 
mystics,  is  avoided.  According  to  the  plan  of  the  work  the  medita- 
tions are  divided  into  four  main  divisions  or  weeks.  In  the  first  period 
the  course  of  the  meditations  is  conducted  so  as  to  produce  in  the 
neophyte  a  kind  of  hypnotism,  a  passive  state  in  which  he  will  be  ready 
to  receive  the  impressions  that  it  is  desired  to  make  upon  him.  In  the 
second  week  the  glories  of  the  Heavenly  King  and  the  privileges  of  His 
service  are  set  before  the  disciple.  The  armies  of  Christ  and  Satan  are 
contrasted,  and  the  demands  tliat  God  makes  upon  men  are  sot  fortli. 
The  third  and  fourth  weeks  are  devoted  to  meditation  upon  the  sacred 
story,  the  life  and  passion  of  Christ,  and  the  enormity  of  human  sin  ; 
and  finally  the  eternal  joys  of  heaven  are  set  before  the  disciple.     To 


Jf.    IT.    II. 


658  Organisation  of  the  Societi/ 

gain  them  he  must  give  up  liberty  and  the  freedom  of  thinking  for 
himself.  Absolute  obedience  to  the  bride  of  Christ,  the  Church,  its 
doctrines  and  its  life,  is  the  only  way  of  salvation. 

Such  was  the  ideal  which  Ignatius  set  before  the  world  in  the  /Spir- 
itual Exercises  ;  and  its  spirit  was  faithfully  reproduced  in  his  Society. 
The  Spiritual  Exercises  became  the  Bible  of  the  Order  and  moulded  its 
religious  life.  The  novice  on  admission  was  trained  in  its  method.  He 
lost  his  personality  to  find  it  again  only  in  the  Society.  He  himself  was 
but  raw  material  for  the  Society  to  mould  as  it  would.  All  his  faculties 
were  to  be  developed,  but  the  initiative  was  never  left  to  him.  The  life 
of  the  Society  was  a  life  of  mutual  supervision  and  subordination.  That 
there  were  diversities  of  gifts  was  fully  recognised,  but  no  man  might  be 
the  judge  of  his  own  capabilities.  The  Society,  through  its  General  and 
those  appointed  by  him,  apportioned  to  each  his  work.  The  novices 
were  distinguished  according  as  they  were  selected  for  the  priesthood  or 
for  secular  duties  ;  while  those  whose  vocation  was  not  yet  clear  formed 
a  separate  class  called  "  indifferents."  After  a  novitiate  of  two  years, 
promotion  was  given  to  the  grade  of  "  scholastics."  Those  who  belonged 
to  this  class  spent  some  five  years  in  the  study  of  arts,  and  then  acted 
themselves  as  teachers  of  junior  classes  for  a  similar  period.  The  study 
of  theology  followed  for  four  or  five  years  ;  and  then  admission  might 
be  given  to  the  rank  of  spiritual  coadjutors.  Others  however  were  con- 
fined to  the  rank  of  temporal  coadjutors.  They  were  employed  in  the 
service  of  the  Society  and  ministered  to  its  needs,  and  may  be  compared 
to  the  lay-brethren  of  other  Orders.  The  great  majority  of  members  of 
the  Society  never  passed  beyond  the  rank  of  spiritual  coadjutor.  They 
took  part  in  all  the  missionary  work  of  the  Society,  in  preaching  and 
teaching.  The  heads  of  its  Colleges  and  Residences  were  taken  from 
this  class  ;  but  they  had  no  share  in  the  government  of  the  Society,  which 
was  confined  to  the  "  Professed  of  the  Four  Vows,"  who  were  the  Society 
in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word.  Besides  the  three  ordinary  vows,  they 
took  one  of  special  allegiance  to  the  Pope,  undertaking  to  go  whitherso- 
ever he  might  order.  The  higher  offices  of  the  Society  were  confined 
to  them.  Their  number  was  always  small  in  comparison  with  the  total 
membership  of  the  Society ;  and  at  the  death  of  Ignatius  they  only 
numbered  thirty-five.  There  was  also  a  small  class  called  the  "  Pro- 
fessed of  the  Three  Vows,"  which  only  differed  from  that  of  the  spiritual 
coadjutors  in  that  the  voavs  were  taken  in  a  more  solemn  way.  It  was 
reserved  for  those  who  were  admitted  into  the  Society  for  exceptional 
purposes. 

At  the  head  of  this  elaborate  hierarchy  stood  the  General.  His 
power  was  absolute  so  far  as  the  ordinary  affairs  of  the  Society  were  con- 
cerned ;  but  he  could  not  alter  its  constitution  except  with  the  consent 
of  the  General  Congregation.  An  intricate  sj^stem  of  checks  and 
counter-checks  guarded  against  any  part  of  the  huge  machine  getting 


Spread  of  its  influence  659 


beyond  his  control,  a  system  to  which  to  some  extent  he  also  was  subject. 
Six  assistants  were  appointed  to  keep  a  watch  upon  liim,  and  the  possi- 
bility of  his  deposition  was  provided  for.  Espionage  and  delation 
permeated  the  whole  Society.  Absolute  as  liis  authority  was,  the 
General  felt  that  in  the  Society  there  was  a  great  impersonal  force 
behind  him,  which  prevented  him  from  departing  from  the  spirit  of  the 
founder. 

Admirably  fitted  as  such  an  organisation  was,  with  its  combination 
of  adaptability  and  stability,  to  carry  on  the  work  of  the  Society  with 
the  least  possible  friction,  yet  it  was  inevitable  that  the  influx  of  able 
men  into  the  Society  should  lead  to  a  variety  of  ideas.  The  intended 
unity  of  thought  as  well  as  action  could  only  be  partially  enforced,  and 
the  abler  minds  could  not  be  made  to  think  alike.  A  considerable 
Spanish  opposition  arose  in  the  Society,  which  criticised  what  it  thought 
to  be  certain  evil  tendencies  in  the  body.  Mariana  wrote  a  work  on 
the  defects  of  the  Order  ;  and  the  theory  of  morals,  which  Pascal 
criticised,  did  not  become  prevalent  in  the  Society  without  a  struggle. 
But  in  its  first  and  golden  age  such  division  as  there  was  did  not  weaken 
to  any  appreciable  extent  its  unity  of  action,  and  it  offered  an  unbroken 
front  to  the  enemies  of  the  Church. 

The  spread  of  the  Society's  organisation  and  the  ubiquity  of  its 
members  in  the  first  years  of  its  existence  were  remarkable.  The  Latin 
countries,  Italy,  Spain,  and  Portugal,  were  soon  covered  with  a  net- 
work of  its  institutions  ;  and  Jesuit  Fathers  became  an  influence  in  the 
counsels  of  Princes.  North  of  the  Alps  progress  was  less  rapid.  In 
Southern  Germany  and  Austria  a  foothold  was  obtained  ;  but  it  was 
not  until  after  the  final  dissolution  of  the  Council  of  Trent  that  much 
progress  was  made  there.  In  France  considerable  opposition  had  to  be 
overcome  before  the  Society  could  obtain  an  entry  at  all  ;  and  its  after- 
wards famous  College  of  Clermont  long  lived  a  precarious  existence. 
Candid  critics  in  the  Church  were  not  wanting.  Melchior  Cano  called 
the  Jesuits  the  precursors  of  Antichrist ;  and  St  Carlo  Borromeo  in 
his  later  years  viewed  with  suspicion  the  power  and  tendencies  of  the 
Society.  Great  as  their  importance  became,  almost  innnediately  after 
their  foundation,  in  the  councils  of  the  Church,  their  missionary  influence, 
at  any  rate  outside  the  Latin  countries,  is  commonly  antedated.  TJieir 
educational  system,  which  was  a  great  advance  on  anything  wliich  had 
gone  before,  was  only  gradually  developed  ;  and  by  means  of  it  their 
greatest  services  to  the  Church  were  rendered.  During  the  years  in 
which  the  Council  of  Trent  sat,  and  in  those  immediately  preceding,  it 
was  the  Inquisition  which  was  the  most  potent  weapon  in  the  liands  of 
the  Papacy.  The  Jesuits  rendered  yeoman  service  at  the  Council  itself, 
and  their  day  came  when  it  was  brought  to  a  successful  conclusion. 

Such  were  the  forces  at  work   in  tlie  Church  when  at  length  cir- 


660  Failure  of  Catholic  reform  [i54i-3 

cumstances  allowed  the  long  deferred  Council  to  meet.  The  Christian 
Renaissance,  with  its  ideal  of  the  unity  of  faith  and  reason  and  its 
attempt  to  find  a  place  within  the  Church  for  all  that  was  best  in  the 
achievements  of  the  human  mind,  its  philosophy,  its  science,  and  its  art, 
was  rapidly  being  eclipsed  by  a  new  spirit,  which  claimed  for  Church 
authority  complete  control,  and  gave  little  scope  to  human  freedom  and 
self-realisation.  The  sacrifice  of  the  intellect  rather  than  its  consecra- 
tion was  demanded.  Mankind  was  to  remain  in  bondage  to  the  dead 
hand  of  the  past.  The  progress  that  was  being  rapidly  made  in  human 
knowledge  was  to  be  ignored.  Catholicism  was  never  to  go  beyond  its 
medieval  exponents.  Conciliation  and  compromise  with  the  new  views 
was  consequently  treason,  and  "  No  surrender  "  was  the  cry. 

Paul  III  stood  aloof  and  looked  on  as  the  new  power  grew  in  strength 
and  made  itself  felt  in  the  Church.  The  last  of  the  Renaissance  Popes, 
he  was  liberal  in  his  sympathies,  but  he  never  gave  his  whole  confidence 
to  any  party.  The  reformed  and  tolerant  Catholicism,  which  seemed 
about  to  prevail  in  the  early  years  of  his  reign,  found  itself  only  partially 
supported,  if  not  abandoned,  and  others  were  allowed  to  frustrate  its 
efforts.  Contarini,  on  his  return  to  Italy  after  the  Colloquy  of  Ratisbon, 
was  rewarded  with  the  government  of  Bologna,  but  his  influence  was 
gone.  His  death  occurred  soon  after,  on  August  24,  1542,  and  he  was 
spared  the  further  disillusionment  which  the  Council  would  have  inevit- 
ably brought  to  him.  He  was  one  of  the  noblest  figures  in  an  age  of 
great  men,  and  the  blessing  of  the  peacemaker  was  his.  Giberti  sur- 
vived him  little  more  than  a  year,  dying  on  December  30,  1543.  The 
loss  of  Contarini  and  Giberti  was  an  irreparable  blow  to  the  party  of 
conciliation.  Sadoleto,  Pole,  and  Morone  survived  ;  but  none  of  them 
had  the  force  of  character  to  fight  a  losing  cause  ;  and  Pole  and  Morone 
ended  their  days  in  trying  to  vindicate  their  orthodoxy,  the  one  by 
playing  the  part  of  a  persecutor  in  England,  the  other  by  winding  up 
the  Council  in  the  papal  interest.  For  the  time,  however,  Viterbo,  of 
which  Pole  was  governor,  became  the  centre  of  the  remnants  of  that 
little  band  which  had  first  found  a  common  bond  in  the  Oratory  of 
Divine  Love.  Everything  now  depended  on  the  coming  Council,  and 
there  was  nothing  but  to  await  events. 

Though  the  Colloquy  of  Ratisbon  had  failed  to  achieve  any  permanent 
result,  yet  the  Emperor  did  not  altogether  despair  of  conciliation.  The 
varying  circumstances  of  the  political  situation  from  time  to  time  affected 
his  attitude  towards  the  Lutherans  ;  but  he  appears  to  have  had  a  genu- 
ine desire  all  along  for  a  thorough  reformation  of  abuses  in  the  Church 
by  a  General  Council,  from  which  the  Roman  Court  itself  was  not  to  be 
exempt.  Paul  III,  on  the  other  hand,  had  little  desire  for  a  Council, 
at  which  it  was  clear,  after  the  events  at  Ratisbon,  that  the  papal 
prerogative  was  likely  to  be  severely  handled.  It  was  impossible  for 
him,  however,  to  resist  the  demands  of  the  Emperor  altogether  ;  and, 


1542-4]  The  Council  of  Trent  661 

after  an  interview  between  tliem  at  Lueca,  Paul  III  at  length  again 
agreed  to  summon  a  Council.  Accordingly  on  May  22,  1542,  a  Bull 
was  published  summoning  a  General  Council  to  meet  at  Trent  on 
November  1,  1542.  Trent  was  selected  as  the  place  of  assembly,  with 
the  hope  of  satisfying  the  German  demand  that  tlie  Council  sliould  meet 
on  German  territory.  Though  the  population  of  Trent  was  mainly 
Italian,  it  was  within  the  Empire  and  under  the  protection  of  Cliarles' 
brother  Ferdinand.  At  the  same  time  it  was  easy  of  access  to  the 
Italian  Bishops,  and  was  not  so  far  distant  as  to  be  beyond  the 
Pope's  control.  It  was  an  ecclesiastical  principality  under  its  Bisliop, 
Christofero  Madruzzo,  Cardinal  of  Trent. 

In  August,  1542,  Parisio,  Morone,  and  Pole,  the  Legates  appointed 
to  open  the  Council,  started  for  Trent ;  and  the  Council  was  duly  opened 
on  November  1.  There  were,  however,  only  a  few  Italian  prelates  present; 
and,  as  no  more  arrived,  by  a  Bull  of  July  6,  1543,  the  Pope  again 
adjourned  the  Council.  The  war  between  Charles  and  Francis  I  again 
made  the  Council  impossible ;  and  at  the  Diet  of  Speier  in  1544  it  Avas 
agreed  that  all  proceedings  against  the  Lutherans  should  be  stayed  until 
a  free  and  general  Council  could  be  held  in  Germany.  Charles  also  pro- 
mised to  hold  a  Diet  in  which  the  religious  questions  sliould  again  be 
discussed  and  if  possible  arranged.  The  Lutherans  were  privatel}'  assured 
that  an  endeavour  should  be  made  to  frame  a  scheme  of  comprehension, 
and  that  the  Pope  should  not  be  allowed  to  stand  in  the  way. 

The  proceedings  at  Speier  seriously  alarmed  the  Pope  ;  and  on 
August  5,  1544,  he  addressed  a  strong  letter  of  remonstrance  to  the 
Emperor.  The  sin  of  Eli  would  be  his,  he  wrote,  if  he  did  not  lift  up 
his  voice  against  the  unwarranted  interference  in  the  affairs  of  religion 
by  the  Emperor  and  the  Diet.  Toleration  was  pernicious,  and  the  attempt 
to  regulate  the  affairs  of  the  Church  in  a  national  assembly  largely 
composed  of  laymen  unheard  of.  He  was  himself  desirous  of  a  reforma- 
tion, and  had  declared  this  often  by  promising  a  Council ;  and  it  was  the 
Emperor  himself  who,  through  the  war,  was  hindering  the  one  means 
which  could  restore  the  peace  of  Christendom.  The  Pope  now  saw  that 
it  was  necessary  for  him  to  take  active  steps  if  the  control  of  the  situation 
was  not  to  pass  out  of  his  hands.  Unless  something  was  done,  Charles 
might  be  driven  to  follow  the  example  of  Henry  VIII,  and  the  German 
Church  might  fall  away  from  the  Holy  See.  The  Council  must  be  held 
in  order  to  satisfy  Charles,  but  it  must  be  conducted  with  quite  other 
objects  than  those  contemplated  by  him.  The  formulation  of  doctrine 
should  be  its  chief  business.  The  old  traditional  doctrine  of  the  Church 
must  be  laid  down  afresh  so  as  to  make  all  conciliation  of  the  Protestants 
impossible.  All  discussion  of  the  papal  prerogatives  must  be  avoided  ; 
and  the  reform  of  practical  abuses  must  take  quite  a  secondary  place. 
Having  enunciated  the  Church's  doctrine,  the  Council  might  leave  to 
the  Holy  Father  the  carrying  out  of  such  reforms  as  were  necessary. 


662  Negotiations  with  Charles  V  [i544-5 

The  Council  in  fact  was  to  be  used  as  an  agent  of  the  Counter-Reforma- 
tion and  as  another  means  to  the  defeat  of  Protestantism. 

All  the  resources  of  a  skilful  and  patient  diplomacy  were  now  devoted 
to  this  end.  A  Bull  was  published  on  September  17,  1544,  summoning 
the  Council  to  meet  on  March  14,  1545 ;  and  Cardinal  Alessandro 
Farnese  was  sent  to  Germany  to  come,  if  possible,  to  an  understanding 
with  the  Emperor.  On  September  18,  1544,  the  Treaty  of  CrejDy  was 
signed,  and  it  was  no  longer  so  essential  to  Charles  to  keep  on  good 
terms  with  the  Lutherans.  The  Emperor  and  the  Papacy  soon  began 
to  draw  nearer  to  one  another.  Charles  refused  to  confirm  the  rights  of 
the  Lutherans  without  regard  to  the  proceedings  of  the  Council,  but  at 
the  same  time  he  proceeded  with  the  greatest  caution.  He  did  not  feel 
strong  enough  as  yet  to  provoke  a  general  contest  with  German  Protest- 
antism. The  Turkish  danger  was  again  imminent,  and  the  Imperial 
treasury  was  empty.  It  thus  came  about  that,  when  at  length  the 
Papacy  was  willing  to  proceed  actively  with  the  Council,  the  Emperor 
on  the  other  hand  wished  to  defer  it  for  a  time,  as  it  seemed  likely  to 
drive  the  Lutherans  to  desperation.  Charles  accordingly  at  the  Diet  of 
Worms  in  1545  allowed  the  religious  question  to  be  again  discussed, 
and  proposed  another  colloquy  of  the  theologians.  Until  the  Diet  was 
concluded  he  requested  the  Pope  to  defer  the  opening  of  the  Council. 
Paul  III  vigorously  protested  against  what  was  nothing  short  of  an  insult 
to  the  Council;  and  the  negotiations  proceeded.  Charles  even  went  so 
far  as  to  propose  the  transference  of  the  Council  to  a  really  German 
town,  from  Trent  which  was  only  German  in  name,  and  the  Pope  replied 
by  threatening  to  translate  it  to  Rome  or  Bologna.  Charles  then  saw 
that  further  concession  was  necessary,  as  he  could  not  afford  to  risk  the 
hostility  of  the  whole  of  Germany,  which  this  transfer  would  inevitably 
provoke.  In  October,  1545,  accordingly,  after  the  conclusion  of  the 
Diet  of  Worms,  he  requested  the  Pope  to  open  the  Council  as  quickly 
as  possible  at  Trent ;  and  informed  him  that  the  religious  negotiations 
at  the  Diet  were  not  seriously  intended,  and  that  their  only  purpose  was 
to  deceive  the  Protestants  until  his  military  preparations  were  ready 
and  he  should  be  able  to  crush  them. 

The  negotiations  that  led  up  to  the  opening  of  the  Council  thus 
ended  in  a  triumph  for  the  Papacy ;  and  the  Protestants  had  little  to 
expect  from  a  Council  which  began  under  such  auspices.  Their  only  hope 
lay  in  a  conflict  of  interests  between  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope,  and  these 
Powers  now  appeared  in  close  alliance.  Their  agreement  was  not  however 
so  close  as  it  appeared,  and  the  Papacy  felt  that  only  the  first  step  had 
been  gained.  Charles,  even  when  in  alliance  with  the  Pope,  never  in- 
tended the  Council  to  content  itself  with  a  solemn  publication  of  Catholic 
dogmas  to  the  world.  A  reform  of  the  Church  in  head  and  members 
was  necessary,  even  if  the  wishes  of  the  Protestants  were  to  be  ignored. 
Charles  never  had  any  intention  of  merely  playing  the  papal  game.    The 


1545]  Legates  for  the  Council  (qypoi)ited  663 

exigencies  of  the  political  situation  would  determine  the  extent  of  the 
concessions  he  would  make  to  the  Papacy  ;  and  Paul  III  felt  that  it  was 
no  easy  task  which  still  lay  before  him. 

Paul  III  deemed  it  unwise  to  preside  in  person  at  the  Council.  An 
old  man  of  nearly  eighty,  the  prospect  of  the  journey  and  a  lengthy 
sojourn  at  Trent  was  alone  sufficient  to  deter  him  from  the  idea  ;  besides 
which  it  was  better  for  the  Papacy  to  avoid  being  directly  involved 
in  the  struggle  of  parties  which  was  inevitable  at  tlie  Council.  He 
accordingly  appointed  three  Legates  to  preside  over  its  meetings  and  to 
conduct  the  business.  They  were  to  keep  in  close  communication  with 
Rome,  and  no  important  matter  was  to  be  decided  until  he  had  been 
consulted.  His  choice  fell  upon  Giovanni  Maria  del  Monte,  Marcello 
Cervini,  Cardinal  of  Santa  Croce,  and  Reginald  Pole.  Del  Monte  and 
Cervini  were  entirely  devoted  to  the  papal  interest.  The  former  was 
hasty  and  impatient,  a  worldly  Cardinal  of  the  unreformed  papal  Court. 
Cervini  represented  the  party  of  Caraffa  and  the  new  Catholicism,  intol- 
erant, narrow,  and  uncompromising,  but  keenly  anxious  for  the  removal 
of  moral  abuses  in  the  Church.  Cervini,  moreover,  was  a  diplomatist  of 
the  first  order  ;  and  it  was  due  to  him  that  the  numerous  rocks  and 
shoals  on  which  the  Papacy  stood  in  danger  of  being  wrecked  during  the 
Council  were  skilfully  avoided.  He  prevented  many  a  scene,  which  the 
haughtiness  of  del  Monte  had  provoked,  from  becoming  serious ;  and  none 
knew  better  how  to  pour-oil  on  troubled  waters.  Pole  was  little  more 
than  a  cipher  from  the  beginning.  His  academic  mind  was  helpless 
amidst  the  play  of  living  forces  in  which  he  found  himself  ;  and  he  had 
to  acquiesce  in  the  policy  of  his  colleagues  who  had  the  Papacy  behind 
them.  His  nomination  as  Legate  was  only  intended  to  give  the  appear- 
ance of  conciliation  to  the  papal  policy,  and  he  felt  himself  helpless  from 
the  first.  He  spoke  several  times  in  favour  of  moderation,  but  soon  lost 
heart.  His  ill  health  provided  him  with  a  convenient  pretext  to  with- 
draw later  from  a  scene  in  which  he  was  doomed  to  be  a  failure.  Great 
as  was  his  intellectual  ability,  he  had  none  of  the  qualities  of  a  leader  ; 
and  he  was  unequal  to  playing  the  part  that  Contarini  might  have  played 
in  the  Council. 

On  March  13, 15-15,  the  Legates  made  their  solemn  entry  into  Trent. 
They  had  the  vaguest  instructions,  and  could  do  nothing  but  wait,  while 
the  negotiations  mentioned  above  went  on  between  Charles  and  the  Pope. 
At  length,  when  a  favourable  juncture  seemed  to  have  arrived,  the  Pope 
ordered  them  to  open  the  Council  on  December  13,  1545,  and  bade  a 
number  of  Italian  Bishops  make  their  way  to  Trent.  The  attendance 
at  the  opening  ceremony  was  but  meagre.  Besides  the  Legates  and 
Cardinal  Madruzzo,  the  Bisliop  of  Trent,  only  four  Archbishops,  twenty 
Bishops,  and  five  Generals  of  Orders,  with  a  small  number  of  theohigians, 
were  present.  Of  the  Bishops,  five  were  Spanish  and  two  French  ;  and 
Sweden,  England,  and  Ireland  were  represented  by  one  Bishop  each. 


664:  Procedui^e  of  the  Council  [1545-6 

Cardinal  Madruzzo  was  the  only  prelate  who  in  any  sense  could  be  said 
to  represent  the  Empire  ;  and  the  rest  were  Italians. 

The  first  three  sessions  were  spent  in  making  the  necessary  arrange- 
ments for  the  business  of  the  Council.  A  division  of  opinion  at  once 
arose  as  to  the  exact  title  to  be  used.  The  proposal  of  the  Legates, 
'■'■  jSacrosancta  Tridentina  synodus  in  Spiritu  sancto  legitime  congregata 
in  ea  praesidentibus  trihus  apostoUcae  sedis  legatis,""  was  not  satisfactory 
to  a  portion  of  the  Council ;  and  it  was  proposed  to  add  the  words 
'•'■  universalem  ecclesiam  representayis.''''  The  intention  of  the  amendment 
was  to  express  the  superiority  of  the  Council  even  to  the  Pope,  and  to 
revive  the  memories  of  Constance  and  Basel.  The  Legates  expressed 
their  dislike  of  it  to  the  Pope  on  these  grounds,  though  in  public  they 
resisted  it  merely  as  being  unnecessary  ;  and  they  succeeded  in  obtaining 
the  rejection  of  the  proposal.  A  question  of  more  practical  importance 
followed  as  to  the  right  of  voting.  At  Constance  voting  had  been  by 
nations ;  and  Abbots  and  theologians,  as  well  as  Bishops  and  Generals 
of  Orders,  were  allowed  to  vote.  The  Bishops  were,  however,  very  jealous 
of  their  privileges  ;  and  it  was  decided  to  confine  the  power  of  voting  to 
Bishops  and  heads  of  religious  Orders.  The  claim  of  absent  Bishops  to 
vote  by  proxy  was  rejected  by  the  Legates  by  order  of  the  Pope.  Only 
Bishops  "  in  partibus  "  might  represent  their  diocesans.  This  was  a 
great  victory  for  the  curial  party.  In  tlie  absence  of  voting  by  nations, 
it  ensured  a  preponderant  influence  to  the  lialian  Bishops,  who  were 
mostly  blind  adherents  to  the  Papacy.  Many  of  them  were  very  poor 
and  were  in  fact  dependent  upon  the  Legates  for  their  daily  bread.  The 
papal  pensions  and  the  hope  of  being  rewarded  with  lucrative  offices  kept 
them  loyal  to  the  Curia,  the  interests  of  which  were  largely  their  own. 

It  was  from  the  Spanish  Bishops  on  the  other  hand  that  the  Legates 
had  most  to  fear.  Charles  had  issued  peremptory  orders  for  them  to 
attend  the  Council ;  and  they  became  the  backbone  of  the  opposition  to 
the  pretensions  of  the  Curia.  The  work  of  Ximenes  had  borne  good 
fruit ;  and  the  Spanish  Bishops  were  the  most  learned  and  the  ablest 
among  the  members  of  the  Council.  Their  orthodoxy  was  unimpeach- 
able, they  had  no  sympathy  with  the  wishes  of  the  moderate  party  for 
conciliation  in  doctrine,  but  equally  with  them  they  were  determined  to 
maintain  the  supremacy  of  the  Council  to  the  Pope,  and  to  remove  the 
abuses  of  the  papal  Court.  So  alarmed  were  the  Legates  by  their  arrival 
and  by  the  prospects  of  an  increase  in  their  number,  that  they  wrote  to 
the  Pope  urgently  requesting  that  ten  or  twelve  capable  Italian  Bishops 
of  proved  fidelity  might  be  sent  to  the  Council  to  resist  them. 

The  divergence  between  the  interests  of  the  Curia  with  its  Italian 
supporters  and  the  foreign  Fathers  was  plainly  revealed  when  the  order 
of  business  came  to  be  determined.  In  his  instructions  to  the  Legates 
Paul  III  clearly  laid  down  that  reform  was  only  a  secondary  and  less 
important  cause  of  the  convocation  of  the  Council.     Its  principal  work 


1546]  Doctrine  and  reform  665 

was  to  be  the  definition  of  dogma.  It  was  for  this  latter  purpose  that 
Paul  III  had  consented  to  summon  the  Council.  By  proclaiming  anew 
the  old  dogmas  reconciliation  with  the  Protestants  would  be  rendered 
impossible  ;  and  before  any  reforms  hostile  to  the  papal  interests  could 
be  undertaken  it  would  probably  be  possible  to  bring  the  Council  to  an 
end.  The  Emperor  and  the  Spanish  Bishops,  together  with  the  few 
moderate  and  independent  men  among  the  Italians,  had  however  no 
intention  of  meekly  submitting  to  the  indefinite  postponement  of  the 
consideration  of  reform.  When  the  Church  had  been  purified,  then  the 
time  would  come  for  the  discussion  of  questions  of  doctrine.  Led  by 
Cardinal  ^Nladruzzo,  who  represented  the  imperial  views,  they  insisted  on 
reform  being  taken  in  hand  at  once.  The  Legates  were  placed  in  a  very 
difficult  position  and  were  afraid  of  risking  an  open  defeat.  Feeling  ran 
so  high  in  the  Council,  that  an  open  revolt  was  likely  if  they  insisted 
on  beginning  with  the  discussion  of  doctrine  alone.  They  accordingly, 
at  the  suggestion  of  Thomas  Campeggio,  the  Bishop  of  Feltre,  proposed 
a  compromise,  that  doctrine  and  reform  should  be  treated  at  the  same 
time  by  the  separate  commissions,  and  should  come  before  the  Council  in 
alternation  ;  and  for  this  proposal,  in  spite  of  the  opposition  of  Cardinal 
Madruzzo,  they  obtained  a  majority  on  January  22,  1546.  The  com- 
promise was  a  partial  defeat  to  the  curial  party  and  revealed  the  strength 
of  the  opposition.  The  Pope  was  furious  and  called  upon  the  Legates 
to  get  the  decision  rescinded.  The  Legates,  however,  pointed  out  that 
this  was  impossible;  and  the  Pope  accordingly  acquiesced  with  a  bad  grace. 
He,  however,  prohibited  the  discussion  of  any  plan  for  the  reform  of  the 
Roman  Court  until  it  had  been  first  referred  to  him.  As  a  consolation 
the  Legates  reminded  the  Pope  that  they  could  always  lengthen  the 
discussion  on  the  dogmas,  so  as  to  receive  his  opinion  on  the  questions 
of  reform  that  were  under  consideration  at  the  same  time. 

The  details  of  the  procedure  of  the  Council  were  arranged  with  less 
difficulty.  The  whole  Synod  was  divided  into  three  classes,  and  the  work 
of  preparation  was  distributed  between  them.  A  preliminary  discussion 
of  each  question,  after  it  had  been  prepared  by  the  theologians  and 
canonists,  was  to  take  place  in  the  special  congregation  to  which  it  was 
allotted.  The  matter  was  then  to  be  further  discussed  in  a  General 
Congregation  of  the  whole  Synod  ;  and  if  approved  it  was  to  be  promul- 
gated in  a  solemn  session  of  the  Council.  The  rules  of  procedure  being 
thus  settled,  the  dogmatic  discussions  were  opened  at  the  Fourth  Session, 
which  began  on  April  8,  1546. 

The  rule  of  Faith  was  first  considered.  The  Nicene  Creed  including 
the  filioque  had  been  reaffirmed  in  tlic  Tliird  Session  with  the  significant 
description  "  symholum  fidei  quo  sancta  Romana  ecdesia  utitur."'  The 
sources  of  knowledge  of  religioustruth  werenowexamined;  and  Scripture 
and  tradition  were  set  side  by  side  as  having  ec^ual  authority.  Tradition 
was  defined  as  ''traditio  ChristV  and  "  traditioapostolorum  (Spiritu  Sancto 


666      The  rule  of  Faith  ;  reform ;  and  Justification     [i546 

dictante) .'''  The  Church  alone  had  the  right  to  expound  Scripture  ; 
but  silence  was  maintained  as  to  the  relations  of  the  Pope  and  the  Church 
in  the  matter.  The  traditional  Canon  of  Scripture  was  accepted  ;  and 
the  Vulgate  was  declared  the  authoritative  text,  which  no  one  was  to 
presume  to  reject. 

It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  these  definitions  would  be  accepted 
without  opposition.  Nacchianti,  Bishop  of  Chioggia,  maintained  that 
Scripture  was  the  sole  rule  of  faith  ;  but  he  found  only  six  supporters. 
Others  proposed  to  distinguish  between  apostolic  traditions  and  tradition 
in  general,  but  they  also  met  with  defeat.  The  declaration  that  the 
text  of  the  Vulgate  was  infallible  was  out  of  harmony  with  the  knowledge 
of  the  time,  and  met  with  criticism  in  the  papal  household  itself.  The 
enthusiasm  of  the  theologians  at  Trent,  mostly  Dominicans,  for  medieval 
theology  was  almost  too  zealous  to  please  the  Roman  Court.  The  Pope 
could  not  help  feeling  a  certain  displeasure  at  the  Council  coming  to  a 
decision  on  such  fundamental  points  without  consulting  the  Holy  See. 
He  directed  the  Legates  to  have  the  decrees  of  the  Fourth  Session 
examined  anew  ;  but,  on  their  protesting,  he  gave  way  and  abandoned 
the  idea  of  dictating  directly  to  the  Council,  on  condition  that  its  decrees 
should  always  be  submitted  for  his  approbation  before  being  published. 

In  accordance  with  the  order  of  business  agreed  upon,  reform  was 
next  taken  in  hand  ;  and  a  discussion  began  upon  a  difficult  point  of 
discipline,  the  question  as  to  the  rules  for  preaching  and  catechising. 
This  raised  the  contentious  question  of  the  relation  of  the  Bishops  to 
the  regular  clergy.  Stormy  scenes  took  place,  and  reverend  prelates  gave 
one  another  the  lie.  The  Bishops  of  Fiesole  and  Chioggia  were  the 
most  offensive  to  the  Legates,  on  account  of  their  plain  speaking,  and 
their  recall  from  the  Council  was  requested  of  the  Pope.  A  considerable 
number  of  Bishops  demanded  that  there  should  be  no  exemptions  from 
episcopal  control.  The  discussions  soon  passed  to  wider  issues.  It  was 
claimed  that  the  residence  of  Bishops  in  their  dioceses  was  '■'•jure  divino,^^ 
and  that  the  Pope  therefore  possessed  no  power  of  dispensing  with  it. 
The  Legates,  however,  succeeded  in  keeping  to  the  question  immedi- 
ately before  them  ;  and  it  was  finally  decided  that,  while  the  regulars 
were  to  be  allowed  to  preach  in  the  churches  of  their  own  Order  with- 
out episcopal  permission,  they  were  to  be  prohibited  from  doing  so  in 
other  churches  without  the  licence  of  the  Ordinary. 

Original  Sin  was  the  next  subject  of  discussion  ;  and  this  led  on  to  the 
thorny  paths  of  Free  Will  and  Justification.  The  Emperor  endeavoured 
to  defer  the  discussion  on  these  speculative  points  ;  but  the  Pope  was 
determined  to  obtain  definitions  which  would  make  the  breach  with  the 
Protestants  irreparable.  The  Legates  again  (June  2,  1546)  requested 
that  more  Italian  Bishops  might  be  sent  to  the  Council  to  cope  with 
the  opposition  ;  and  the  consideration  of  the  nature  of  Justification  was 
entered  upon.    A  Neapolitan,  Thomas  de  San  Felicio,  Bishop  of  La  Cava, 


1546]  Seripa7ido.— The  Jesuits  667 

and  a  few  theologians,  maintained  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith 
alone,  but  their  views  could  obtain  no  hearing ;  and  a  scene  ensued 
in  which  San  Felicio  and  a  Greek  Bishop  fell  upon  one  anotlier,  and 
the  latter's  beard  was  torn  out  in  handf  uls.  Tlie  discussion  then  confined 
itself  to  the  mediating  view  which  Contarini  had  advocated  in  his 
Tractatus  de  Justificatione.  Fighius,  Fflug,  and  Gropper  liad  maintained 
a  similar  position  in  Germany ;  and  it  had  the  adherence  of  some  of  the 
ablest  Catholic  intellects,  both  north  and  south  of  the  Alps.  Seripando, 
the  General  of  the  Augustinians,  was  the  chief  champion  in  the  Council 
of  this  view.  Seripando  in  many  respects  resembled  Sadoleto.  The 
best  elements  of  humanism  and  Christianity  were  united  in  him  ;  and 
the  position  he  took  up  on  this  doctrine  was  in  harmony  with  the 
traditions  of  the  Augustinian  Order.  He  distinguislied  between  an 
"  inherent "  and  an  "  imputed  "  righteousness ;  and  the  "  inherent "  only 
justified  because  of  the  "  imputed  " ;  the  one  was  needed  to  complete 
the  other.  In  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ  alone,  however,  la}-- 
our  final  hope.  The  inherent  righteousness,  the  righteousness  of  works, 
was  by  itself  of  no  avail. 

It  was  in  this  discussion  that  Laynez  and  Salmeron,  the  two  Jesuits 
who  had  been  brought  to  the  Council  by  Cervini  as  the  Fope's  theolo- 
gians, first  played  a  prominent  part  in  the  debates  of  the  assembly. 
Ignatius  was  of  opinion  that  the  Council  was  not  of  very  high  import- 
ance;  but  he  wished  his  Society  to  receive  favourable  notice  there. 
Laynez  and  Salmeron  had  received  very  careful  instructions  as  to  their 
behaviour  in  the  Council.  They  were  to  use  every  opportunity  for 
preaching  and  carrying  on  pastoral  work.  Dogmatics,  however,  were  to 
be  avoided  in  the  pulpit,  and  no  excessive  asceticism  that  might  be 
repellent  was  to  be  practised.  The  Spiritual  Uxercises  were  to  be 
introduced  whenever  an  occasion  offered  itself.  In  tlie  meetings  of  the 
Council  they  were  to  speak  Avith  moderation  and  avoid  giving  offence ; 
but  they  were  to  oppose  anything  approaching  to  the  new  views.  Every 
night  they  were  to  meet  and  discuss  their  joint  plans  of  action  with  Le  Jay. 

The  politic  instructions  of  Ignatius,  which  Laynez  and  Salmeron 
faithfully  carried  out,  were  eminently  successful.  The  Jesuits  were 
exempted  from  the  general  prohibition  of  preaching  during  tlie  Council, 
and  soon  obtained  considerable  influence  with  the  Si)anish  Bishops. 
They  came  to  be  known  as  the  great  advocates  of  purity  of  dogma  and 
scholasticism  in  the  Council ;  and  their  importance  rapidly  increased. 
When  Ignatius  wished  to  recall  Laynez,  Cervini  wrote  to  say  that  he 
was  indispensable.  With  regard  to  the  conflicting  claims  of  the  Fapacy 
and  the  Bishops,  Ignatius  wished  the  Jesuits  to  play  the  role  of  mediator  ; 
but  this  position  was  soon  abandoned,  and  they  became  the  scientific 
supporters  of  the  Roman  claims.  Their  skill  in  patristic  and  scliolastic 
quotation  was  remarkable,  and  they  read  to  the  Council  what  were  whole 
treatises  rather  than  speeches. 


668  Inherent  mid  imputed  righteousness  [i546 

Laynez  especially  devoted  himself  to  the  great  question  of  Justi- 
fication. While  admitting  the  distinction  between  "  inherent "  and 
"  imputed  "  righteousness,  he  maintained  that  the  "  imputed  "  righteous- 
ness became  involved  in  the  "inherent."  The  merits  of  Christ  were 
imparted  to  man  through  faith ;  and  we  must  rely  on  the  merits  of 
Christ  not  because  they  complete  but  because  they  produce  our  own. 
The  efficacy  of  works  was  thus  implied.  Seripando  had  maintained 
that  we  must  rely  on  the  "  imputed  "  righteousness  :  the  righteousness 
of  Christ  was  alone  true  and  sufficient,  and  it  was  our  faith  in  that 
which  ultimately  justified  us.  Such  a  view  made  reconciliation  with  the 
Protestants  not  impossible,  while  that  of  Laynez  brought  all  hopes  of 
agreement  to  an  end. 

In  his  speech  against  Seripando,  Laynez  pointed  out  with  great  skill 
the  weakness  of  mediating  theology ;  and  the  superficial  clearness  of  his 
logic  appealed  to  the  assembled  Fathers.  The  moderate  party,  though 
unable  to  persuade  the  Council  of  their  views,  were  yet  able  to  obtain  a 
decree  on  the  subject  sufficiently  ambiguous  to  allow  the  possibility  of 
the  development  of  Jansenism  in  the  future.  The  formula,  however, 
made  reconciliation  with  the  Protestants  impossible ;  and  the  Papacy 
and  the  Jesuits  thus  obtained  their  object.  Pole  exhorted  the  Council 
not  to  reject  any  opinion  simply  because  it  was  held  by  Luther,  but  his 
voice  had  little  weight.  Seripando  was  left  to  lead  the  moderates ;  and 
Pole  left  the  Council  at  the  end  of  June,  his  health  breaking  down,  and 
retired  to  Padua.  In  August  the  Pope  requested  him  to  return  to 
Trent,  but  he  excused  himself  ;  and  in  October  he  was  definitely  relieved 
of  his  functions.  Meanwhile  the  decrees  of  the  Fifth  Session  were 
solemnly  published  on  June  17,  1546 ;  and  Paul  III  approved  and 
ratified  by  a  brief  the  decrees  with  regard  to  preaching.  Only  the 
Bishop  of  Fiesole  protested  against  this  indirect  claim  of  the  Pope  that 
the  decrees  of  the  Council  required  his  assent  and  confirmation. 

Though  the  Legates  had  successfully  steered  their  way  through  the 
discussions  on  the  most  fundamental  points  of  doctrine,  they  still  feared 
the  determination  of  the  Emperor  and  the  Spani'sh  Bishops  to  carry  out 
a  thorough  reform.  To  prevent  this  they  endeavoured  to  procure  the 
translation  of  the  Council  to  an  Italian  town  where  it  would  be  more 
completely  under  their  control.  Madruzzo,  who  was  the  energetic 
advocate  of  the  Emperor,'s  ideas  on  the  subject  of  reform,  had  several  ac- 
rimonious conflicts  with  the  irritable  del  Monte  ;  and  the  situation  again 
became  strained.  Cardinal  Pachecho  went  so  far  as  to  accuse  the  Legates 
of  falsifying  the  votes.  The  charge  was  groundless,  but  it  is  an  indica- 
tion how  high  feeling  ran.  The  Emperor  peremptorily  refused  to  consent 
to  the  translation  of  the  Council;  and  the  Legates  had  to  content 
themselves  with  endeavouring  to  obtain  the  solemn  publication  of  the 
decrees  on  Justification.  A  further  rampart  against  the  Protestants  in 
the  form  of  doctrinal  decrees  upon  the  Sacraments  was  also  prepared ; 


1546-7]  Justification. — Residence  of  Bishops  6G9 

and,  while  the  Emperor  endeavoured  to  prevent  further  definition  of 
doctrine,  the  Legates  did  all  they  could  to  hasten  it  on.  Fearing  to 
press  the  Emperor  too  far,  Cervini,  diplomatic  as  ever,  proposed  a 
compromise.  The  publication  of  the  decrees  on  Justification  was  to  be 
delayed,  if  the  Emperor  would  consent  to  the  suspension  of  the  Council 
for  six  months  and  to  all  disciplinary  reform  being  left  to  tlie  Pope. 
The  Emperor  hoAvever  rejected  the  proposal  at  once ;  and  the  Legates 
then,  on  December  29,  1546,  persuaded  the  Council  to  agree  to  the 
publication  of  the  decrees  on  Justification  at  the  Sixth  Session  on  January 
13, 1547.  This  was  accordingly  done;  and  the  decrees  were  confirmed 
by  the  Pope,  who,  as  a  concession  to  the  Council  in  return  for  the 
adjournment  of  the  question  of  the  residence  of  Bishops,  proceeded  to 
publish  a  Bull  requiring  Cardinals  holding  bishoprics  in  plurality  to 
resign  them  within  a  certain  date.  So  far  as  it  was  carried  out,  the  Bull 
was  little  more  than  a  dead  letter,  as  they  reserved  to  tliemselves  many 
pensions  and  charges  upon  the  revenues  of  the  sees  which  they  resigned. 

Rapid  progress  was  made  meanwhile  with  the  decrees  on  the  Sacra- 
ments, while  that  on  the  residence  of  Bishops  was  again  delayed.  The 
view  that  residence  was  '•^jure  divino^"'  and  therefore  not  dis[)ensable  by 
the  Pope,  was  again  insisted  on  by  the  Spanish  Bishops ;  and  Carranza 
WTote  a  special  treatise  on  the  subject.  But  the  servile  Italian  majority 
was  continually  increasing  ;  and,  when  the  independent  Bishop  of  Fiesole 
maintained  that  the  Episcopate  possessed  all  spiritual  powers  in  itself 
and  that  Bishops  were  not  simpl}^  the  delegates  of  the  Pope,  the 
manuscript  of  his  speech  was  demanded,  in  order  that  he  might  be 
proceeded  against  for  derogating  from  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See. 
This  was  however  too  much  for  the  Council ;  and  such  a  storm  ensued 
that  his  manuscript  was  returned  to  him.  The  Legates  however  suc- 
ceeded in  avoiding  any  mention  of  tlie  Cardinals  in  the  decree  on  resi- 
dence, and  no  reference  was  made  to  the  question  whether  it  was  ^'■jure 
divino  "  or  not.  Residence  was  simply  declared  necessary,  and  power 
was  given  to  Bishops  to  visit  all  the  churches  of  their  diocese,  including 
the  Cathedral  Chapter.  The  whole  decree  was,  however,  limited  by  the 
prescription  that  it  was  not  to  diminish  in  any  way  the  authority  of 
the  Holy  See.  In  this  form  it  was  solemnly  published  at  the  Seventli 
Session  on  INIarch  5,  1547,  together  with  decrees  on  the  Sacraments  in 
general,  and  on  baptism  and  confirmation. 

While  affairs  were  thus  proceeding  in  the  Council,  the  Emperor  was 
obtaining  a  series  of  successes  in  Germany  which  alarmed  the  Pope. 
Paul  III  had  no  desire  to  see  Charles  too  powerful,  and  was  afraid 
that  he  might  come  in  person  to  Italy  and  insist  on  far-reaching  reforms. 
He  therefore  determined  to  authorise  the  Legates  to  transfer  the  Council 
to  Bologna.  The  translation  was  not,  however,  to  be  carried  out  on  the 
sole  authority  of  the  Legates,  but  they  were  to  endeavour  to  obtain  a 
vote  of  the  Council  approving  of  it.     A  convenient  pretext  was  found 


670         Removal  and  adjournme}it  of  the  Council     [1547-50 

in  the  fact  that  there  had  been  a  few  cases  of  plague  in  Trent ;  and,  on 
the  ground  that  the  health  of  the  Fathers  was  endangered,  at  the  Eighth 
public  Session  (March  11,  1547)  the  Council  by  38  votes  to  14,  with 
4  abstentions,  decided  to  adjourn  to  Bologna.  Cardinal  Pachecho  and 
the  Spanish  Bishops  however  remained  at  Trent  and  awaited  the 
Emperor's  orders. 

Charles  was  exceedingly  angry  when  he  heard  the  news.  He  refused 
in  any  way  to  recognise  the  translation  of  the  Council ;  and  the  Spanish 
Bishops  were  prohibited  from  quitting  Trent  on  any  pretext  whatsoever. 
They  were,  however,  to  refrain  from  any  conciliar  act  which  might 
provoke  a  schism.  The  course  of  European  politics  during  the  next  two 
years  has  been  narrated  elsewhere.  Charles  remained  firm.  His  political 
difficulties  did  not  diminish,  but  the  mission  of  Cardinal  Sfondrato  did 
not  move  him,  and  Paul  III  was  disappointed  of  his  hopes  from  France. 
The  Diet  of  Augsburg  recognised  the  prelates  at  Trent  as  the  true 
Council ;  and  the  Emperor  attempted  to  settle  the  religious  affairs  of 
the  nation  by  the  Interim  until  a  General  Council  acceptable  to  him 
should  meet.  Nothing  remained  for  Paul  III  but  to  bow  to  the 
inevitable ;  and  on  September  17,  1549,  he  formally  suspended  the 
Council  of  Bologna.  The  Pope  made  a  show  of  himself  undertaking 
the  reform  of  the  Church,  and  appointed  a  commission  of  Cardinals  for 
the  purpose  ;  but  before  liis  real  intentions  in  the  matter  could  become 
clear  he  died  (November  10,  1549). 

The  Cardinal  del  Monte  came  out  of  the  conclave  as  Julius  III  on 
February  7,  1550.  Reginald  Pole  was  nearly  elected,  but  Caraffa 
reminded  the  Conclave  of  his  Lutheran  tendencies  at  the  Council,  and 
succeeded  in  turning  the  scale  against  him.  Gervini  was  the  candidate 
of  the  party  of  reaction ;  but  the  Imperialists  regarded  him  as  their 
most  dangerous  enemy  at  Trent  and  secured  his  exclusion.  Del  Monte, 
though  he  had  been  not  less  hostile  to  the  interests  of  the  Emperor, 
might  be  gained  over ;  and  events  justified  to  some  extent  their  antici- 
pations. The  new  Pope  was  utterly  selfish.  He  only  desired  to  enjoy 
the  Papacy  in  peace,  and  he  was  quite  willing  to  acquiesce  in  the 
Emperor's  wishes,  so  far  as  they  did  not  entail  any  loss  of  power  to  the 
Holy  See.  He  at  once  agreed  to  the  return  of  the  Council  to  Trent, 
and  on  November  14,  1550,  published  a  Bull  summoning  it  to  meet  on 
May  1,  1551.  In  return  for  a  guarantee  from  the  Emperor  that  the 
papal  authority  should  remain  intact,  he  even  consented  to  leave  it  an 
open  question  whether  the  preceding  decisions  of  the  Council  were 
binding  and  to  grant  the  Lutherans  a  hearing. 

The  new  Pontificate  seemed  to  be  opening  under  the  most  favourable 
auspices.  Reform  was  again  entered  upon  at  Rome.  A  commission  of 
six  Cardinals  was  appointed  to  consider  the  conditions  of  appointment 
to  benefices,  and  another  commission  to  reform  the  procedure  of  Con- 
claves.    Difficulties,  however,  soon  arose.     Henry  II  of  France  wished 


1551]  Second  meeting  of  the  Council  671 

the  Pope  to  join  a  league  against  the  Emperor,  and,  when  he  declined, 
refused  to  recognise  the  coming  Council.  The  German  Bishops,  and 
still  more  the  Protestants,  despaired  of  any  good  result  from  another 
papal  assembl}^  and  showed  no  eagerness  to  attend.  The  Spaniards 
likewise  were  reluctant  to  take  a  long  journey  which  would  probably  be 
fruitless.  Only  some  forty  prelates  were  present  at  Trent  when  the 
Council  was  reopened  on  May  1,  1551.  Cardinal  Marcello  Crescenzio, 
together  with  two  Bishops,  Pighino,  Archbishop  of  Siponto,  and  Lippo- 
mano.  Bishop  of  Verona,  were  the  papal  representatives.  The  two 
Bishops,  with  the  title  of  Nuncios,  were  to  assist  Crescenzio,  who  alone 
exercised  the  legatine  authorit}-. 

The  choice  of  presidents  did  not  augur  well  for  the  success  of  the 
Assembly.  Crescenzio  was  a  blind  adherent  of  tiie  Papacy,  and  obstinate 
to  boot ;  and  his  assistants  w^ere  equally  attached  to  the  curial  party. 
They  well  understood  that  it  was  their  business  to  proceed  further  with 
the  emphatic  restatement  of  the  old  dogma  in  the  interests  of  the 
Papacy,  which  had  been  so  successfully  begun.  The  Papacy  had  no 
more  intention  of  conciliation  in  doctrine  than  it  had  during  the 
Sessions  held  under  Paul  III.  Tlie  second  meeting  at  Trent  was  thus, 
from  the  beginning,  doomed  to  failure  so  far  as  the  Protestants  were 
concerned,  as  the  first  had  been.  The  Emperor  and  the  Pope  were  no 
more  in  real  agreement  than  before.  The  meagre  attendance  at  the 
opening  left  no  alternative  to  the  Council  but  to  adjourn;  and  Sep- 
tember 1  w^as  accordingly  fixed  for  the  first  (Twelfth)  public  Session. 
By  that  time  the  Electors  of  Alainz  and  Trier  had  arrived,  together  with 
a  few  other  German  and  Spanish  Bishops.  It  w^as  agreed  to  take  up 
the  work  at  the  point  at  wdiich  it  had  been  dropped  in  the  previous 
assembly  of  the  Council ;  and  in  this  manner  all  its  previous  decisions 
were  tacitly  confirmed.  In  such  circumstances  it  was  little  good  at- 
tempting to  persuade  the  Protestants  to  send  representatives  to  the 
Council ;  but  nevertheless  the  Emperor  persevered  in  the  attempt. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  was  the  first  subject  entered  u[ion  by 
the  Council.  Laynez  and  Salmeron,  who  again  appeared  in  the  Council 
as  the  Pope's  theologians,  and  with  a  greater  influence  than  ever,  strongly 
opposed  any  concession  to  Protestant  views  in  the  matter,  even  in  points 
of  discipline,  such  as  communion  in  both  kinds.  The  Jesuits  had  a 
considerable  share  in  drawing  up  the  decrees  and  adopted  a  purely 
conservative  attitude.  The  German  prelates,  however,  and  a  few  others 
advocated  strongly  a  concession  with  regard  to  the  cup.  Finally,  at  the 
request  of  the  representative  of  the  Emperor,  the  matter  was  deferred 
until  the  Protestants  should  arrive.  Meanwhile  the  discussion  on  reform 
was  resumed.  The  abuse  of  the  right  of  appeal  to  the  Pope  from  the 
episcopal  Courts  was  prohibited,  and  the  procedure  of  the  Courts  regu- 
lated. Decrees  to  this  effect,  together  with  the  decisions  on  the  Eucha- 
rist, omitting  those  on  communion  in  both  kinds,  were  promulgated  at 


672  Protestants  at  the  Council  [i55i-5 

the  Thirteenth  public  Session,  which  was  held  on  October  11,  1551. 
A  safe-conduct  was  also  granted  to  the  Protestants  who  should  attend 
the  Council,  though  not  until  after  much  negotiation  as  to  its  exact 
wording. 

The  Legate  began  now  to  grow  anxious  as  to  the  course  affairs 
would  take  on  the  arrival  of  the  Protestants,  and  tried  to  hasten  the 
deliberations  of  the  Council.  At  the  general  Congregation  on  Novem- 
ber 5,  Crescenzio  proposed  tliat  the  Fathers,  in  order  to  save  time, 
should  simply  accept  or  reject  the  articles  that  the  theologians  had 
prepared.  The  proposal  was,  however,  rejected  by  a  bare  majority.  As 
the  two  Jesuits  were  now  the  most  influential  among  the  theologians, 
the  success  of  the  Legate's  proposal  would  have  meant  that  they  would 
have  practically  dictated  the  decrees  of  the  Council. 

The  Sacraments  of  Penance  and  of  Extreme  Unction  were  next  dis- 
cussed, together  with  thirteen  further  decrees  on  reform.  Many  minor 
grievances  were  removed,  but  burning  questions  were  skilfully  avoided. 
The  conclusions  arrived  at  were  promulgated  at  the  Fourteenth  public 
Session,  held  on  November  25,  1551.  At  length,  in  January,  1552, 
some  Protestant  delegates  arrived  in  Trent,  representing  the  Duke  of 
Wiirttemberg,  the  Elector  Maurice  of  Saxony,  and  a  few  of  the  south 
German  towns.  The  Legate  opposed  their  admission  to  the  public 
Congregation  unless  they  first  accepted  all  the  conclusions  of  the  Coun- 
cil ;  but  the  representatives  of  the  Emperor  finally  overcame  the  opposi- 
tion of  the  Legate,  and  the  delegates  were  allowed  to  address  the 
general  Congregation  on  January  24,  1552.  The  only  result  was  to 
reveal  how  wide  was  the  gulf  between  the  Council  and  the  Protestants. 
Nevertheless,  at  the  Fifteenth  public  Session  on  January  25,  1552,  it 
was  decided  to  adjourn  the  next  public  Session  until  March  19, 1552,  in 
order  to  enable  other  Protestants  to  arrive ;  and  another  and  more  ex- 
plicit safe-conduct  was  granted  to  them.  The  theological  discussions 
meanwhile  continued,  but  nothing  was  done.  It  was  obvious  that  the 
situation  was  hopeless.  In  February  many  of  the  Bishops  departed. 
In  March  the  Protestant  delegates  also  left;  and  finally,  on  the  news 
of  the  rapid  advance  of  Maurice  of  Saxony,  the  Council  was  suspended 
on  April  28,  1552. 

The  Peace  of  Passau  (1552)  and  its  confirmation  at  the  Diet  of 
Augsburg  (1555)  marked  the  failure  of  the  Emperor's  policy.  The  unity 
of  the  Church  was  definitely  broken.  The  two  Confessions  were  com- 
pelled to  tolerate  one  another  in  their  respective  spheres  ;  and  all  attempts 
at  conciliation  and  compromise  were  abandoned.  So  far  as  the  Papacy 
was  concerned,  the  Council  passed  away  as  a  bad  dream.  Julius  III 
determined  to  risk  no  more  experiments;  and  the  remainder  of  his 
pontificate  was  spent  in  beautifying  his  villa  near  the  Porta  del  Popolo, 
the  Villa  di  Papa  Griulio,  which  is  his  chief  memorial.  On  his  death  on 
March  24, 1555,  Cervini  at  last  ascended  the  papal  throne  as  Marcellus  II. 


1555-9]  Policij  of  Pope  Paul  I V  673 

He  was  the  first  true  Pope  of  the  Counter-Reformation,  of  bhimeless 
life  and  untarnished  orthodoxy,  and  zealous  for  reform.  A  friend  of  the 
Jesuits,  he  was  at  the  same  time  tactful  and  diplomatic  ;  and  he  well 
understood  the  maxim  that  on  occasions  more  prudence  and  less  piety 
was  better  than  more  piety  and  less  prudence.  But  Marcellus  II 
only  survived  his  election  three  weeks,  and  was  succeeded  by  the 
uncompromising  Caraffa,  who  took  the  title  of  Paul  IV.  The  Counter- 
Reformation  was  now  master. 

The  new  reign  began  in  earnest  with  reform.  The  Papacy  itself 
would  purify  the  Church  and  needed  no  Council  to  assist  it,  A  Bull 
was  published  announcing  that  the  first  care  of  the  new  Pontiff  would 
be  the  reform  of  the  universal  Church  and  of  the  Roman  Court.  Con- 
gregations were  appointed  to  carry  out  this  announcement.  Edict  after 
edict  was  issued  for  the  reform  of  convents  ;  and  the  whole  method  of 
appointment  to  clerical  offices  was  overhauled.  But  what  no  one  could  have 
anticipated  happened.  Reform  and  the  Catholic  reaction  were  sacrificed 
to  what  Paul  IV  thought  were  the  political  interests  of  the  Holy  See. 
He  had  ever  been  a  hater  of  Spain,  and  he  now  made  it  his  object  to 
free  the  Papacy  from  its  thraldom.  His  unworthy  nephews  attained  an 
ascendancy  over  him  by  playing  upon  the  anti-Spanish  mania  of  the  old 
man.     The  purification  of  the  Church  sank  into  the  background. 

But  the  failure  of  his  nephews  to  achieve  the  object  dearest  to  his 
heart  opened  his  eyes  towards  the  end  of  the  year  1558  ;  and,  when 
Cardinal  Pachecho  had  the  courage  at  the  session  of  the  Inquisition  on 
January  9,  1559,  to  reply  to  Paul's  excited  cries  of  "  Reform  !  Reform  !  " 
"  Holy  Father,  reform  must  first  of  all  begin  among  ourselves,"  the  Pope 
was  convicted  of  sin.  His  nephews  were  banished,  and  reform  of  the 
whole  administration  in  Church  and  State  was  again  begun.  A  large 
remission  of  taxation  had  marked  Paul's  accession,  and  the  burdens  of 
the  people  were  now  still  further  lightened.  The  Dataria,  on  which  all 
the  schemes  of  reform  under  Paul  III  had  been  shattered,  was  taken 
in  hand  once  more,  and  with  a  considerable  measure  of  success.  The 
removal  of  vexatious  taxation  and  of  the  toll  on  good  works  was  pressed 
forward.  At  the  beginning  of  the  reign  Ignatius  and  Laynez  had  been 
consulted  ;  and  Paul  IV  realised  from  the  example  of  their  Society  that 
freedom  of  spiritual  services  was  the  road  to  success.  He  saw  tliat  tlie 
whole  system  of  fees  levied  on  every  possible  occasion  was  utterly  bad. 
Marriage  dispensations,  a  very  profitable  source  of  revenue,  he  would  have 
none  of.  Ofhcials  must  not  live  by  Court  fees,  nor  sliould  their  oflices 
be  bought  and  sold,  or  performed  by  a  deputy  who  had  to  make  his  own 
profit.  In  short,  the  object  of  Paul's  reforms  was  to  substitute  direct  for 
indirect  taxation.  The  levying  of  tenths  was  approved  ;  and  the  people 
were  to  be  taught  that  it  was  their  duty  to  give  directly  towards  the 
support  of  the  Holy  See.  At  the  same  time  Paul  IV  recognised  that  too 
many  of  the  rights  of  the  Bishops  had  been  absorbed  by  Rome ;  and  in 


674  Pope  Pius  IV  a7id  the  Council  [1559-61 

this  way  many  of  his  reforms  anticipated  the  ordinances  made  later  in 
the  last  Sessions  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

An  equal  zeal  for  purity  of  doctrine  and  for  purity  of  life  was  shown 
by  the  energetic  old  man.  The  Inquisition  exercised  its  powers  with  the 
utmost  vigour,  and  even  Cardinals  were  not  spared.  Morone  was  im- 
prisoned; and  the  suppression  of  liberal  Catholicism  as  well  as  Protestant 
opinions  was  now  definitely  taken  in  hand.  The  Inquisition  and  the  Index 
suppressed  the  slightest  tendency  to  diverge  from  medieval  theology.  The 
spirit  of  Ignatius  and  his  Society  had  now  taken  possession  of  the  Church. 

Paul  IV,  however,  died  on  August  18,  1559  ;  and  an  immediate 
reaction  set  in  in  Rome.  The  severity  of  his  measures  had  made  him 
many  enemies  ;  and  even  among  those  in  favour  of  reform  there  was  a 
considerable  number  who  had  no  wish  that  it  should  be  the  arbitrary 
work  of  the  Pope.  All  the  Cardinals  accordingly,  before  entering  the 
Conclave,  bound  themselves  to  summon  anew  the  General  Council  in  the 
case  of  their  being  elected  ;  and  on  December  26, 1559,  Giovanni  Angelo 
de'  Medici  (Medicino)  was  elected  Pope.  He  was  a  Milanese,  of 
middle-class  origin,  and  unconnected  with  the  great  Florentine  family. 
Learned  and  kindly  and  of  exemplary  life,  he  was  better  acquainted  with 
the  times  in  which  he  lived  than  his  predecessor  had  been.  He  wished 
to  live  at  peace  with  all  men,  and  to  win  the  support  of  the  Catholic 
monarchs  for  the  Holy  See.  At  the  same  time,  he  had  no  intention  of 
suffering  any  diminution  of  the  papal  prerogative.  Before  his  accession 
he  had  expressed  himself  in  favour  of  concessions  in  discipline,  such  as 
the  practice  of  communion  in  both  kinds ;  and  he  believed  that  by  this 
means  a  Council  might  heal  the  divisions  of  the  Catholic  world  without 
endangering  the  rights  of  the  Holy  See.  Events  showed  that  it  was 
not  so  easy  to  confine  the  issues  to  such  narrow  lines  ;  but  at  the  open- 
ing of  his  reign  Pius  IV  looked  forward  to  a  Council  with  no  misgiving. 

The  Emperor  Ferdinand  and  Francis  II  of  France  greeted  with 
approval  the  proposals  of  the  Pope  to  hold  a  Council.  But  they  at  once 
proceeded  to  name  conditions  which  were  received  with  little  favour  at 
Rome.  Complete  freedom  must  be  given  to  the  Council.  It  must  be 
held  in  a  German  town,  and  it  should  work  above  all  for  the  reconciliation 
of  the  Protestants.  In  view  of  these  proposals,  Pius  IV,  chiefly  under  the 
influence  of  his  nephew  Carlo  Borromeo,  Secretary  of  State,  drew  back  from 
the  idea  of  a  Council.  The  Pope,  in  his  turn,  made  impossible  conditions, 
and  considered  the  question  of  carrying  out  the  necessary  reforms  by 
means  of  Congregations  of  Cardinals.  Events  in  France,  however,  com- 
pelled the  Pope  to  proceed  with  the  proposed  Council.  The  States- 
General  at  Orleans  (January  10,  1561)  ordered  the  French  Bishops  to 
meet  on  January  20,  1561,  to  prepare  for  a  National  Council  if  the 
announcement  which  had  been  made  of  a  General  Council  were  not  carried 
out.  A  papal  Bull  had  been  issued  on  November  29,  1560,  summoning 
a  Council  to  Trent  for  April  6,  1561  ;  and  Pius  hastened  to  assure  the 


1560-1]  The  Potvers  and  the  Council  675 

French  of  the  seriousness  of  his  intentions.  The  French  national  synod 
was  accordingly  abandoned  ;  and  Trent  was  accepted  as  the  place  of 
meeting.  Before  the  assembly  could  meet  there  was,  however,  another 
difficulty  to  be  settled.  The  Emperor  and  the  French  government  wished 
for  an  explicit  declaration  that  the  Council  was  a  new  assembly,  and  not 
merely  a  continuation  of  the  previous  Sessions  at  Trent  as  Philip  II  and 
the  Spanish  Church  insisted.  The  sympathies  of  the  Pope  were  with 
Philip  ;  but  it  was  necessary  not  to  offend  the  Emperor  and  the  French. 
Accordingly  the  question  was  left  in  doubt,  and  no  definite  pronounce- 
ment was  made  on  the  matter. 

jNleauAvhile  the  preparations  for  the  Council  went  on.  The  Pope 
instructed  his  Nuncios  to  invite  all  Christian  Princes  to  the  Council, 
whether  schismatic  or  not.  The  Protestant  Powers,  however,  had  little 
confidence  in  the  proposed  assembly  ;  and  it  soon  became  clear  that  the 
Council  would  be  confined  to  the  nations  still  in  communion  with  the 
See  of  Rome.  Ferdinand,  however,  and  the  French  government  had  no 
intention  of  allowing  the  Council  simply  to  register  the  wishes  of  the 
Curia.  Both  Powers  wished  for  concessions  which  might  unite  to  the 
Church  the  moderate  Protestants  and  disaffected  Catholics  in  their 
dominions.  The  reforms  which  they  desired  are  enumerated  in  the 
instructions  given  to  the  French  ambassadors  at  the  Council,  and  in  the 
Libel  of  Reformation  which  the  Emperor  caused  to  be  drawn  up.  The 
Mass  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  revision  of  the  service  books,  communion 
in  both  kinds,  the  marriage  of  priests,  reform  of  the  Curia  and  a 
reduction  in  the  number  of  Cardinals,  the  enforcement  of  residence  on 
ecclesiastics,  the  abolition  of  the  whole  system  of  dispensations  and 
exemptions,  and  a  limitation  of  the  power  of  excommunication,  were 
among  the  chief  points  demanded.  The  whole  Church  system  was  in 
fact  to  be  revised,  and  the  share  of  the  Papacy  in  its  government  to  be 
reduced.  Bavaria  supported  most  of  these  demands  ;  and  in  fact  nearly 
all  Catholics  north  of  the  Alps  desired  a  radical  reform  of  the  Church. 

Philip  11  and  the  Spanish  Bishops,  on  the  other  hand,  wished  for  no 
alteration  in  the  ritual  and  practice  of  the  Church  ;  but  they  equally 
desired  a  thorough  reform  of  the  Curia  and  a  diminution  of  the  papal 
authority.  At  the  same  time  they  wished  it  to  be  distinctly  declared 
that  the  assembly  was  a  continuation  of  the  previous  Council,  and  that 
an  effectual  bar  should  be  thus  provided  against  any  advances  towards 
Protestantism.  The  Spanish  Bishops  were  opposed,  even  more  strongly 
than  the  papal  Court,  to  any  alteration  in  the  discipline  and  practice  of 
the  Church.  The  division  among  the  Catholic  Powers  gave  the  Papacy 
a  means  of  which  it  was  quick  to  avail  itself.  The  history  of  the  third 
meeting  of  the  Council  of  Trent  is  mainly  the  story  of  the  skilful  diplo- 
macy with  which  the  Papacy  played  off  one  nation  against  another  and 
succeeded  in  bringing  all  efforts  for  radical  reform  to  naught.  The  task 
was  not  dii'ficult,  as  there  was  little  co-operation  among  the  Powers  even 


676  Third  meeting  of  the  Council  at  Trent        [i 561-2 

in  the  pursuit  of  objects  whicli  they  had  in  common  ;  and  the  Council 
ended  in  strengthening  rather  than  weakening  the  papal  grip  upon  the 
Church.     The  Papacy  supported  by  the  Italian  episcopate  defied  tne 

Christian  world.  ^^     r^         •^ 

No  less  than  five  Legates  were  appointed  to  preside  over  the  Council. 
At  their  head  was  placed  Ercole  di  Gonzaga,  Cardinal  of  Mantua, 
brother  of  the  Duke,  a  man  of  conciliatory  disposition  ;  and  he  had  ior 
his  colleagues  Girolamo  Seripando,  the  former  General  of  the  Augus- 
tinians,  who  had  played  a  prominent  part  in  the  earher  Sessions,  Luigi 
Simonetta,  and  Jacopo  Puteo,  both  of  them  canonists  of  renown,  and 
Stanislaus  Hosius,  who  had  worked  hard  against  heresy  m  Poland  i  he 
last-named  three  were  firmly  devoted  to  the  papal  interests.  Puteo, 
however,  soon  fell  ill,  and  his  place  was  taken  by  Cardinal  Marc 
d'Altemps,  Bishop  of  Constance,  a  young  man  of  little  experience. 
Ludovico  Madruzzo,  nephew  of  Cardinal  Madruzzo,  had  succeeded  his 
uncle  in  the  bishopric  of  Trent,  and  received  the  Legates  on  their  arrival 
on  April  16,  1561. 

The  Bishops,  however,  arrived  but  slowly,  and  summer  and  autumn 
went  by.  At  length  the  Pope  could  wait  no  longer,  and  fixed  the  first 
CSeventeenth)  Session  for  January  18, 1562.  There  were  then  assembled 
for  the  opening  of  the  Council  five  Cardinals,  three  Patriarchs,  eleven 
Archbishops,  ninety  Bishops,  four  Generals  of  Orders,  and  four  Abbots. 
The  first  business  undertaken  by  the  Council  was  the  question  of  an  Index 
of  Prohibited  Books.  It  was  decided  to  revise  the  Index  issued  by  I  aul  IV  ; 
and  a  commission  of  eighteen  prelates  was  appointed  for  the  purpose. 
A  safe-conduct  was  then  granted  to  any  Protestants  who  might  come  to 
the  Council  in  the  same  terms  as  that  granted  under  Julius  III.  But  this 
was  nothing  more  than  a  formality,  as  there  was  not  the  least  prospect 
that  any  would  attend.  Itwas,  however,  necessary  to  satisfy  theEmperor 
so  far  Although  the  numbers  present  at  the  opening  of  the  Council 
were  o-reater  than  they  had  ever  been  in  any  of  the  earlier  Sessions  at 
Trent^or  Bologna,  the  assembly  was  purely  a  gathering  of  the  Catholic 
world  There  was  no  longer  even  the  possibility,  which  had  existed  at 
an  earlier  date,  of  a  frank  meeting  oE  the  Protestants  and  a  consideration 
of  their  objections.  The  Papacy  had  defeated  the  attempt  before,  and 
mutual  distrust  now  made  it  hopeless.  The  interest  of  the  third  meeting 
of  the  Council  lies  in  the  effort  made  by  certain  elements  in  Catholicism 
to  readjust  the  balance  of  forces  in  the  government  of  the  Church,  and 
to  satisfy  the  needs  of  Catholics  north  of  the  Alps.  _      _ 

The  cleft  between  the  parties  revealed  itself  at  the  very  beginning 
of  the  Council.  The  Legates  inserted  in  the  decree  concerning  the 
opening  of  the  Council  the  words  ^^ proponentibus  legatis  ac  praesulen- 
tibusr  Against  this  the  Spanish  Bishops,  led  by  Guerrero,  Archbishop 
of  Granada,  protested.  Its  object  was  to  diminish  the  independent 
power  of  the  Council  apart  from  the  Pope,  by  taking  away  its  right  ot 


1562] 


Parties  in  the  Council  677 


initiative.  Any  proposals  hurtful  to  the  Papacy  and  the  Curia  would 
thus  be  barred.  Philip  II  through  his  ambassadors  supported  the 
objections  of  the  Spanish  Bishops  to  the  clause.  The  Legates  however 
explained  the  words  away,  and  the  opposition  had  not  the  courage  to 
bring  the  matter  to  the  vote.  The  situation  at  first  was  not  ver}' 
promising  for  the  opposition.  A  little  group  of  Spanish  Bishops,  led  by 
a  determined  man,  the  Archbishop  of  Granada,  stood  face  to  face  with 
an  overwhelming  number  of  Italian  prelates,  the  great  majority  of 
whom  were  devoted  to  or  dependent  upon  the  Curia.  A  few  northern 
Bishops  and  a  few  independent  Italians  supported  them,  but  they  were 
not  certain  of  the  help  even  of  all  the  Spaniards.  Some  of  these,  chief 
of  whom  was  the  Bishop  of  Salamanca,  had  already  been  won  over  by 
the  Curia.  Behind  the  Spanish  Bishops,  however,  were  the  Catholic 
Powers.  All  alike  were  determined  to  maintain  the  liberty  of  the 
Council  to  declare  its  supremacy  over  the  Pope,  and  to  free  the  Church 
from  the  curial  despotism.  There  was,  however,  no  harmony  of  action 
and  a  singular  lack  of  co-operation  among  them,  even  for  the  objects 
which  they  had  in  common.  Moreover  their  efforts  were  ultimately 
paralysed  by  the  fact  that,  Avhile  the  Emperor  and  France  desired  the 
Council  to  start  entirely  afresh  and  to  make  concessions  in  Church  ritual 
and  practice  which  would  meet  the  needs  of  their  respective  countries, 
Spain,  on  the  other  hand,  was  determined  that  the  Council  should  be 
considered  a  continuation  of  the  old,  and  develop  the  old  dogma  and 
practice  on  the  traditional  lines.  The  skilled  intriguers  of  the  Curia 
found  a  promising  field  for  their  work. 

The  second  (Eighteenth)  public  Session  washeld  on  February  26, 1562. 
The  resolutions  with  regard  to  the  Index  and  the  safe-conduct  to  the 
Protestants  were  then  published.  The  Congregations,  meanwhile,  pro- 
ceeded with  their  work  ;  and  doctrine  and  reform  were  taken  in  hand 
together  as  before.  The  decrees  on  the  Eucharist  were  taken  up  at 
the  point  where  they  had  been  left  in  1552.  Communion  in  both 
kinds,  and  the  communion  of  children,  remained  to  be  considered.  The 
articles  of  reform  dealt  with  diocesan  and  parochial  admuiistration  ;  and 
the  question  of  the  residence  of  Bishops  was  again  raised.  Simonetta 
endeavoured  to  avoid  a  declaration  on  the  subject ;  but  to  this  the  Council 
would  not  consent  ;  and  on  March  11,  1562,  its  discussion  was  begun 
by  the  general  Congregation.  The  Council  was  unanimous  as  to  the 
necessity  of  residence  ;  the  only  disagreement  was  as  to  its  being  ''jure 
divino''  or  merely  ''lege  eeelesiasticd."'  This  indirectly  raised  the  ques- 
tion of  the  limits  of  papal  authority  ;  and  the  controversy  soon  became 
heated.  The  Legates  were  not  agreed  as  to  the  attitude  they  should 
adopt.  Simonetta  opposed  any  concession  on  the  subject,  while  tho 
Cardinal  of  Mantua  and  Seripando  hesitated.  At  length,  on  April  20, 
the  Legates  put  the  question  to  the  vote.  GQ  voted  for  the  divine  nature 
of  the  obligation  of  residence,  while  71  either  rejected  it  absolutely 


678  Question  of  continuity  [i562 

or  voted  for  remitting  the  question  to  the  Pope.  The  result  was 
not  altogether  pleasing  to  the  Curial  party.  Only  a  minority  had  voted 
for  a  direct  negative  on  the  subject.  Simonetta  wrote  secret  letters  to 
Rome,  accusing  his  colleagues  of  betraying  the  interests  of  the  Holy  See 
by  precipitately  putting  the  matter  to  the  vote.  The  whole  Council 
was  now  in  a  state  of  confusion.  The  Cardinal  of  Mantua  and 
Seripando  ceased  to  feel  sure  of  their  ground.  The  papal  letters  to  the 
Legates  changed  their  tone.  Borromeo  urged  Simonetta  to  ox3i)ose  any 
action  of  his  colleagues  which  would  be  hurtful  to  the  interests  of 
the  Holy  See.  The  recall  of  the  Cardinal  of  Mantua  was  seriously 
considered  at  Rome.  Everything  stood  still  while  fi-equent  letters  were 
exchanged  between  the  Legates  and  Rome.  The  French  ambassador 
profanely  remarked  that  the  Council  was  not  free,  as  the  Holy  Spirit 
came  to  Trent  in  the  courier's  bag  from  Rome. 

To  add  to  the  difficulties  of  the  Legates,  on  June  2  a  despatch 
arrived  from  Rome  ordering  the  Council  to  be  definitely  declared  a 
continuation.  Philip  II  had  insisted  on  this,  and  the  Pope  had  had  to 
give  way.  But,  no  sooner  had  the  news  arrived,  than  the  French  and 
Imperial  ambassadors  declared  that  they  and  the  prelates  of  their 
respective  countries  would  take  no  further  part  in  the  Council  if  this 
were  done.  There  was  nothing  for  the  Legates  to  do  but  to  temporise, 
in  spite  of  the  distinct  orders  of  the  Pope  ;  and  on  June  6  the  Twentieth 
Session  was  held,  merely  to  be  prorogued.  Meanwhile,  the  general 
Congregation  continued  the  discussion  of  the  decrees  on  the  Eucharist ; 
and  here  the  question  of  communion  in  both  kinds  caused  further 
trouble.  A  cross  division  of  j)arties  arose,  Spain  and  Italy  against 
France  and  Germany.  The  Imperial  ambassadors  allowed  themselves  to 
be  outwitted  by  the  Legates.  The  consideration  of  Ferdinand's  Lihel 
of  Reformation  was  deferred  ;  and  the  Council  occupied  itself  with 
matters  of  purely  secondary  importance.  The  Legates  knew  well  how 
to  follow  Borromeo's  advice  and  to  gain  '•'•il  beneficio  del  tempo.'''' 

Pius  IV  meanwhile  hesitated.  He  gave  way  to  the  Legates  on  the 
point  of  the  continuation  and  left  the  logic  of  facts  to  demonstrate  its 
reality.  He  mollified  Philip  as  best  he  could.  With  regard  to  the 
obligation  of  residence  nothing  was  done.  After  the  vote  of  April  20 
the  Legates  had  referred  it  to  the  Pope,  and  rumours  reached  Trent  that 
Pius  had  declared  it  to  be  "-jure  divino,'''  but  this  was  not  confirmed. 
The  Curia  came  to  no  decision.  It  was  unwise  to  run  counter  to  the 
opinion  of  the  great  majority  of  the  Catholic  world  in  the  matter,  and 
the  question  was  left  in  suspense.  To  show  the  zeal  of  the  Papacy 
three  Bulls  were  published  at  the  end  of  May  reforming  the  Apos- 
tolic Chamber,  the  Penitentiary,  and  the  Chancery  ;  and  meanwhile  the 
Council  marked  time. 

So  hopeless  did  the  situation  appear  that  the  Pope  even  contem- 
plated the  transference  of  the  Council  to  an  Italian  town  and  a  complete 


1562]  Communion  in  both  kinds  679 

breach  with  the  non-Italian  nations.  So  strong  an  opposition,  however, 
showed  itself  to  the  mere  suggestion  that  the  idea  had  to  be  aban- 
doned ;  and  other  means  were  adopted  to  bring  the  Council  to  a 
more  reasonable  frame  of  mind.  Carlo  Visconti,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Ventimiglia,  the  Pope's  confidential  agent  at  Trent,  worked  unceasingly 
to  increase  the  papal  influence  in  the  Council.  The  old  methods  were 
pursued  with  the  Italian  Episcopate.  When  a  Bisliop  arrived  at  Trent, 
Visconti  consulted  with  the  Legates  as  to  whether  he  should  receive 
payment  for  his  services  or  not.  Those  who  could  not  be  reached  by 
pensions  were  not  always  proof  against  the  hope  of  promotion  in  the 
Church.  When  these  methods  failed,  threats  were  sometimes  effective. 
The  fev/  independent  Bishops  underwent  the  most  outrageous  provoca- 
tions and  too  easily  lost  heart.  They  gave  up  the  struggle  before  it 
was  half  begun.  The  papal  diplomacy  was  completely  successful ;  and 
Philip  was  persuaded  to  order  the  Spanish  Bishops  to  let  the  question  of 
the  divine  obligation  of  residence  drop  for  a  while.  Pius  made  matters 
smoother  by  taking  the  hint  from  Visconti  to  treat  the  Cardinal  of 
Mantua  with  more  consideration,  and  flattered  many  of  the  Bishops 
of  the  opposition  with  complimentary  letters.  Simonetta  was  warned 
not  to  show  excessive  zeal,  and  he  and  the  Cardinal  of  Mantua  were 
publicly  reconciled. 

The  Twenty-first  public  Session  was  at  length  held  on  July  21, 1562, 
and  the  decrees  on  the  Eucharist  and  on  reform  were  solemnly  published, 
the  questions  of  the  possibility  of  granting  the  chalice  and  the  nature  of 
the  obligation  of  residence  being  skilfully  avoided.  The  Council  went 
on  to  discuss  the  doctrine  of  the  Mass  ;  and  further  decrees  dealing  with 
reform  were  drawn  up.  The  Imperial  ambassadors,  who  throughout 
the  Council  displayed  little  tact,  pressed  on  the  Legates  an  immediate 
consideration  of  the  Emperor's  demands  for  the  use  of  the  chalice  in 
Germany.  The  Pope  all  along  had  not  felt  strongly  on  the  point  ;  and 
so  persistent  was  the  German  demand  that  he  was  prepared  to  accede  to 
it.  The  Spanish  and  Italian  opposition  to  the  concession  was,  however, 
very  strong,  and  Laynez  threw  all  his  influence  into  the  scale  against  it. 
He  read  a  lengthy  theological  treatise  on  the  subject,  and  influenced 
many  votes.  In  these  circumstances  it  would  have  been  wise  for  the 
Emperor  to  proceed  cautiously  and  not  run  the  risk  of  an  open  defeat. 
The  ambassadors,  however,  thought  otherwise;  and  on  August  22  the 
Cardinal  of  Mantua  submitted  the  Emperor's  proposal  to  the  Council. 
The  voting  took  place  on  September  6,  when  29  voted  in  the  affirmative 
simply  ;  31  in  the  affirmative  with  the  proviso  that  tlie  matter  should  be 
referred  to  the  Pope  ;  19  were  in  favour  of  its  being  granted  in  Hungary 
and  Bohemia  alone  ;  38  rejected  it  absolutely  ;  10  did  the  same  but 
desired  to  leave  the  definite  decision  to  the  Pope ;  24  were  in  favour  of 
its  being  left  to  the  Pope  without  the  Council  expressing  an  opinion  ; 
and   14^  thought   the    matter   not   yet   ripe   for   decision.     It   was   a 


680  Sacrament  of  Orders  [i562 

discouraging  result  for  the  Imperial  ambassadors,  but  they  made  one  more 
effort  and  moved  a  decree  recommending  to  the  Pope  the  request  of  the 
Emperor.  This  was,  however,  rejected  by  79  to  69.  The  Cardinal  of 
Mantua,  however,  came  to  the  rescue,  to  avoid  a  breach  with  the 
Emperor,  and  on  September  16  moved  to  refer  the  matter  simply  to 
the  Pope,  without  any  expression  of  opinion  on  the  part  of  the  Council. 
Simonetta  gave  his  support  to  this  proposal,  and  it  was  carried  by 
98  votes  to  38.  The  Emperor  thus  at  the  best  could  get  nothing  from 
the  Council,  and  was  referred  back  to  the  Pope.  At  the  Twenty-second 
public  Session,  which  took  place  on  the  following  day  (September  17, 
1562),  the  decrees  on  the  Mass  and  a  series  of  minor  reforms  were 
approved  ;  but  even  then  31  Bishops  voted  against  any  reference  of  the 
question  of  the  chalice  to  the  Pope. 

The  Council  then  took  up  the  discussion  of  the  Sacrament  of  Orders. 
Though  there  was  little  disagreement  as  to  the  nature  of  the  grace 
conferred  in  ordination,  yet  the  question  of  the  relations  of  the  various 
members  of  the  hierarchy  to  one  another  and  to  the  Pope  was  likely  to 
cause  difficulty,  and  troubled  waters  were  soon  again  entered  upon.  The 
French  and  Imperial  ambassadors  protested  against  any  further  definition 
of  dogmas,  and  demanded  that  the  Council  should  await  the  arrival  of 
the  French  and  German  Bishops  who  were  on  their  way.  A  thorough 
reform  of  the  Church  might  then  be  entered  upon.  They  further 
complained  of  the  haste  in  which  proceedings  were  conducted.  The 
Legates  only  communicated  the  decrees  on  reform  to  the  Bishops  two 
days  before  the  general  Congregations,  and  it  was  impossible  to  examine 
them  properly  in  that  time.  The  Legates  returned  an  evasive  answer, 
and  the  discussions  on  the  Sacrament  of  Orders  were  proceeded  with. 
The  papal  legion  was  strengthened  by  the  arrival  of  more  Italian  Bishops ; 
and  at  the  same  time  several  of  the  more  independent  prelates  left  Trent. 
The  Spaniards  felt  that  it  was  necessary  to  assert  themselves  again;  and 
on  November  3  the  Archbishop  of  Granada  propounded  the  view  that 
Bishops  were  the  Vicars  of  Christ  by  the  divine  law  under  His  chief 
Vicar  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  This  raised  the  whole  question  of  the  Pope's 
supremacy,  and  an  angry  debate  ensued.  The  Bishop  of  Segovia  went  so 
far  as  to  say  that  the  supremacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  unknown  to 
the  primitive  Church.  Laynez  again  made  himself  the  chief  advocate  of 
the  papal  prerogative  and  displayed  a  violent  hostility  to  the  Episcopate. 
In  the  midst  of  these  discussions  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  arrived  with 
twelve  French  Bishops  and  three  Abbots  on  November  13,  1562.  The 
attitude  which  he  would  adopt  was  eagerly  awaited  by  both  parties. 
On  November  23  the  Cardinal  appeared  in  the  assembly  and  in  a  speech 
made  similar  demands  to  those  made  by  the  Emperor  in  the  Lihel  of 
Reformation^  and  a  little  later  declared  himself  in  favour  of  the  divine 
right  of  the  Episcopate.  On  January  2, 1563,  the  French  demands  were 
formally  presented  to  the  Legates.     The  articles  were  thirty-four  in 


loG2-3]      The  Cardinal  of  Lor  mine  and  Ferdinand         G81 

number  and  embraced  most  of  the  proposals  previously  demanded  by  the 
Emperor.  They  suffered  the  same  fate  as  his  and  were  simply  forwarded 
to  Rome  for  consideration. 

It  was  now  obvious  to  all  that  the  Papacy  had  no  intention  of 
carrying  out  any  reforms  of  importance.  Tiie  papal  policy  was  clearly 
expressed  in  a  letter  of  Borromeo  to  the  Legates,  in  which  he  informed 
them  that  they  must  keep  two  objects  in  sight,  that  of  strengthening 
the  papal  power  over  the  Council,  and  that  of  procuring  its  speedy 
dissolution.  To  this  intent  the  Legates  endeavoured  to  liave  the  Pope 
described  as  '•^rector  universalis  ecelesiae""  in  the  canon  dealing  with  the 
Episcopate  ;  but  owing  to  the  opposition  of  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  they 
failed.  The  interminable  discussions  continued  ;  month  after  month 
passed  by  and  nothing  was  done.  At  the  beginning  of  February 
Ferdinand  had  moved  to  Lmsbruck  with  the  object  of  being  nearer  the 
scene  of  affairs.  The  Legates  thereupon  sent  Commendone  to  see  him 
and  endeavour  to  come  to  some  understanding.  His  embassy,  however, 
had  little  success  and  he  soon  returned  to  Trent. 

All  turned  now  upon  the  action  of  France  and  the  Emperor.  On 
February  12,  15G3,  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  journeyed  to  Innsbruck  to 
confer  with  Ferdinand;  and  there  he  found  assembled  with  the  Emperor, 
Maximilian,  King  of  the  Romans,  Albert  V,  Duke  of  Bavaria,  and  the 
Archbishop  of  Salzburg.  The  Cardinal,  in  a  memorandum  which  lie 
presented  to  the  Emperor,  attributed  the  barren  result  of  the  Council 
to  the  fact  tliat  only  matters  which  had  been  approved  of  at  Rome  were 
allowed  to  be  decided  at  Trent.  The  overwhelming  majority  of  Italian 
Bishops,  and  the  fact  that  the  right  of  initiative  rested  Avith  the  Legates 
alone,  prevented  any  real  reform.  As  a  remedy  the  Cardinal  suggested 
that  the  Ambassadors  should  have  the  right  of  making  proposals  directly 
to  the  Council,  and  that  a  larger  number  of  non-Italian  Bishops  should 
be  sent  for  to  counterbalance  the  Italian  majority.  Above  all,  the 
Emperor  should  come  in  person  to  Trent  and  exercise  his  influence 
upon  the  Council. 

Ferdinand,  however,  saw  little  hope  in  these  proposals.  It  was  a 
practical  impossibility  to  find  any  other  non-Italian  Bishops  who  would 
go  to  Trent  ;  and  his  own  presence  would  give  the  papal  pai-ty  an  oppor- 
tunity of  raising  the  cry  that  the  Council  was  not  free.  To  attempt  to 
give  the  Ambassadors  a  right  of  initiative  in  the  Council  would  only 
lead  to  the  breaking  up  of  the  assembly.  The  Emperor  was,  in  fact,  fast 
losing  hope  of  obtaining  any  good  from  the  Council.  The  failure  t«> 
obtain  the  concession  of  the  chalice  from  the  Council  in  September, 
1562,  was  a  great  disappointment  to  him  ;  and  the  slow  progress  that 
the  Council  had  made  since  that  time  filled  him  with  despair.  At  the 
beginning  of  March,  1563,  he  turned  to  the  Pope  instead  of  to  the 
Council,  in  the  hope  of  persuading  him  to  bring  about  some  effective 
reforms.     The  Pope  threw  all  the  blame  for  the  delay  upon  the  Council, 


682  The  new  Legates.  —  Canisius  [i563 

and  especially  upon  the  Spanish  Bishops  for  raising  theoretic  and  useless 
questions.  In  this  way  one  country  could  be  played  off  against  another. 
The  Papacy  perceived,  however,  that  Ferdinand's  confidence  in  the 
Council  was  much  shaken,  and  determined  to  send  a  Cardinal  to 
Innsbruck  to  endeavour  to  alienate  him  from  it  still  further. 

Meanwhile  at  Trent  still  further  delay  was  caused  by  the  death  of 
two  of  the  Legates,  The  Cardinal  of  Mantua  died  on  March  2,  and 
Cardinal  Seripando  on  March  17, 1563.  Cardinal  d' Altemps  had  returned 
to  Rome  some  time  previously  ;  and  Simonetta  and  Hosius  did  not  care 
to  act  alone.  They  accordingly  wrote  to  the  Pope  asking  that  two 
new  Legates  might  be  sent.  The  papal  choice  fell  upon  ^lorone  and 
Navagero.  The  former  was  now  a  devoted  servant  of  the  Papacy  and 
had  re-established  his  reputation  for  orthodoxy.  He  was,  however,  very 
acceptable  to  the  Emperor,  and  the  moderate  party  still  had  some  hopes 
of  him.  Navagero,  on  the  other  hand,  was  an  open  adherent  of  the 
curial  party.  The  new  Legates  arrived  at  Trent  on  April  13,  1563. 
Morone,  after  an  introductory  discourse  to  the  assembled  Fathers,  at 
once  set  out  for  Innsbruck.  The  Jesuit  Father,  Canisius,  was  with  the 
Emperor  and  acted  as  the  agent  of  the  Roman  Court  in  the  Imperial 
entourage.  This  remarkable  man,  the  first  German  Jesuit,  Avas  perhaps 
the  ablest  of  the  leaders  of  the  Catholic  reaction  in  Germany.  Alike  at 
Cologne,  where  he  withstood  the  influence  of  the  Archbishop  Hermann 
von  Wied,  and  at  Ingolstadt,  where  in  1550  he  became  Rector  of  the 
University,  he  turned  back  the  advancing  tide  of  Protestantism.  In 
1552  Ferdinand,  then  King  of  the  Romans,  had  summoned  him  to 
Vienna,  and  Canisius  soon  obtained  considerable  influence  over  him. 
At  Ferdinand's  request  Canisius  drew  up  a  Catechism,  which  was 
translated  into  many  languages  and  from  which  thousands  were  in- 
structed in  the  rudiments  of  the  Catholic  faith.  His  Summa  Doctrinae 
Christianae  became  the  text-book  of  Catholic  teachers  and  preachers 
throughout  Germany.  When  Ignatius  set  up  a  Province  of  his  Society 
in  Upper  Germany,  it  was  only  natural  that  he  should  place  Canisius  at 
its  head.  Directly  Canisius  heard  of  the  arrival  of  Morone  at  Trent  he 
sent  urgent  messages  to  him  to  come  to  Innsbruck  as  soon  as  possible. 
France  and  Spain  had  not  yet  agreed  upon  active  co-operation  with  the 
Emperor;  but  with  so  many  objects  in  common  an  agreement  as  to  a 
course  of  action  might  occur  at  any  moment.  Canisius  skilfully  j)repared 
the  way  for  Morone.  LLe  pointed  out  to  Ferdinand  that  by  an  amicable 
arrangement  with  the  Holy  Father  he  might  obtain  more  than  he  would 
ever  get  from  the  Council.  Ferdinand  began  to  waver.  His  previous 
policy  had  ended  in  failure.  Philip  had  been  unmoved  by  his  warning 
that  reform  of  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church,  and  not  only  of 
its  discipline,  was  necessary  to  preserve  Germany  to  the  Church.  By 
means  of  the  Council  he  had  achieved  nothing.  Morone  now  arrived  with 
the  definite  offer  of  the  concession  of  the  chalice  directly  the  Council 


1563]     Dissensions  of  the  French  and  the  Spaniards      683 

should  be  terminated ;  and  Ferdinand  was  won  over.  He  agreed  to  give 
the  Legates  his  support,  and  dechired  himself  content  with  the  minor 
reforms  that  the  Legates  proposed  to  put  before  the  Council.  The 
Papacy  had  thus  gained  the  lirst  step.  It  remained  to  come  to  terms 
with  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine  and  Philip  IL 

Morone  returned  to  Trent  on  May  27,  and  the  discussions  on  the 
Sacrament  of  Orders  were  actively  resumed.  It  was  finally  decided  to 
avoid  all  mention  of  the  disputed  points  as  to  the  direct  divine  origin 
of  episcopal  authority  and  whether  residence  was  '-'■jure  divino  "  or  not. 
The  decrees  in  this  ambiguous  form  were  published  at  the  Twenty-third 
public  Session  on  July  15,  1563.  The  difficulties  of  the  Legates  were, 
however,  not  yet  over.  Philip  sent  to  the  Council  a  new  ambassador, 
the  Count  de  Luna,  who  was  instructed  to  demand  anew  the  suppression  of 
the  formula  '■^  proponentihus  legatis"  and  pressed  forward  the  formulation 
of  doctrine  and  a  thorough  reform  of  discipline.  But  the  Emperor  gave 
his  support  to  the  Legates,  and  the  situation  remained  unchanged. 
National  feeling  now  ran  very  high,  and  a  dispute  as  to  precedence 
between  the  French  and  Spanish  ambassadors  nearly  brought  the  Council 
to  an  end.  The  state  of  tension  is  well  illustrated  by  the  interjection 
of  a  member  of  the  Curialist  party  after  a  French  prelate  had  denounced 
the  abuses  of  the  Roman  Court  :  "  a  scahie  H'lspana  incidimus  in  morhum 
G-allicum.'^ 

Meanwhile  efforts  were  being  made  to  draw  the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine 
over  to  the  papal  party.  A  man  of  little  sincerity,  able  and  ambitious, 
he  considered  his  own  interests  alone.  After  the  death  of  his  brother, 
the  Due  de  Guise,  and  the  conclusion  of  the  Treaty  of  Amboise,  his 
position  was  not  very  secure  at  home  ;  and  in  those  circumstances  the 
friendship  of  the  Holy  See  was  not  to  be  despised.  The  papal  diplomacy 
began  its  work  early  in  the  year  1563  ;  and  by  the  end  of  June  the 
Cardinal  was  won  over.  Through  his  influence  the  French  government 
agreed  in  August  to  tlie  Council  being  brought  to  an  end  on  the  terms 
which  the  Emperor  had  accepted.  The  French  Bishops  meekly  followed 
the  lead  of  the  Cardinal  and  ceased  to  oppose  the  policy  of  the  Legates. 
The  Spaniards  alone  remained,  and  agreement  with  them  was  not  so 
easy.  They  were  the  puritans  of  the  Council.  Political  expediency  had 
no  meaning  to  them.  As  they  could  not  be  bought,  the  only  thing  for 
the  Papacy  to  do  was  to  outmanceuvre  tliem. 

Direct  appeals  to  PhiUp  II  to  consent  to  the  Council  being  brought 
to  an  end  failed  ;  so  there  was  for  the  time  nothing  to  be  done  but  to 
allow  the  Council  to  occupy  itself  in  matters  which  were  comparatively 
of  little  importance.  The  Sacrament  of  Matrimony  was  discussed  and 
its  nature  defined.  The  marriage  of  priests  was  forbidden  without  any 
opposition,  though  the  Imperial  ambassadors  made  a  feeble  protest. 
The  question  of  clandestine  marriages  gave  some  trouble.  They  had 
admittedly  given  rise  to  great  abuses,  but  the  view  that  the  Sacraments 


684  Close  of  the  Council  of  Trent  [i563 

were  ipso  facto  operative  (ex  opere  operato},  drove  many  of  the  prelates  to 
advocate  their  recognition.  Finally,  however,  they  were,  by  133  votes 
to  59,  declared  invalid.  The  work  of  reform  was  also  continued.  The 
Legates  brought  forward  a  series  of  decrees  for  the  reform  of  the  morals 
and  discipline  of  the  clergy.  They  involved  the  abandonment  by  the 
Curia  of  many  valuable  privileges,  but  at  the  same  time  they  entrenched 
upon  the  rights  of  the  State.  To  ecclesiastical  tribunals  powers  were 
assigned  which  no  government  could  afford  to  tolerate  ;  the  rights  of 
patrons  were  interfered  with  ;  and  immunities  of  the  clergy,  which  had 
long  been  abandoned  in  practice,  were  again  claimed.  The  Catholic 
Powers  for  once  united  in  their  protests,  and  the  more  extravagant 
claims  were  withdrawn  in  consequence.  The  conduct  of  the  Cardinal  of 
Lorraine  in  this  matter  shows  how  completely  he  had  thrown  in  his  lot 
with  the  Hol}^  See.  He  had  visited  Rome  in  September,  and  his  head 
was  completely  turned  by  the  flattery  which  he  received.  He  went  so 
far  as  to  advise  the  French  government  to  submit  to  some  of  the  ex- 
travagant claims  put  forth  on  behalf  of  the  clergy  ;  but  his  advice  was 
not  followed.  The  Council  now  resolved  itself  into  chaos.  The  control 
of  the  Legates  became  little  more  than  nominal.  Pius  himself  had  con- 
sented to  a  reform  of  the  Cardinals  being  included  in  the  general  reform 
of  the  clergy;  but  the  Italian  Episcopate  were  not  willing  to  see  what  they 
regarded  as  the  privileges  of  their  nation  swept  away.  They  succeeded 
in  reducing  the  proposed  reforms  of  the  Sacred  College  to  a  mere  shadow. 
The  French  ambassadors  withdrew  to  Venice,  hopeless  of  any  good  coming 
out  of  such  an  assembly.  The  firmness  of  the  Spanish  Bishops,  however, 
prevented  the  scheme  of  reform  being  completely  nullified  by  reserva- 
tions and  exceptions  ;  and  on  November  11,  1563,  the  Twenty-fourth 
public  Session  was  held,  and  the  decree  on  matrimony  and  twenty-one 
out  of  the  forty-two  decrees  on  reform  proposed  by  the  Legates  were 
promulgated,  the  remaining  decrees  being  deferred  to  a  later  Session. 

Everything  was  now  subordinated  to  bringing  the  Council  to  an 
end.  The  Papacy  ordered  the  Legates  to  withdraw  the  proposals  which 
infringed  the  rights  of  the  State  ;  and  canons  dealing  with  the  remaining 
matters  under  discussion  were  drawn  up  with  feverish  haste.  Purgatory, 
the  Invocation  of  Saints,  and  Indulgences  were  hastily  defined  ;  and 
twenty  more  decrees  of  reformation  were  prepared.  The  Spanish 
ambassador  and  the  Spanish  Bishops  maintained  their  protests  to  the 
end,  but  with  no  avail.  A  rumour  that  the  Pope  was  dying  hastened 
matters  still  faster.  The  Twenty -fifth  Session  was  opened  on  Decem- 
ber 3,  1563  ;  and  on  December  4  the  Council  was  brought  to  an  end 
amid  tlie  acclamations  of  the  assembled  Fathers.  255  members  of  the 
Council  signed  its  decrees,  the  four  Legates,  Cardinal  Madruzzo  and 
the  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  3  Patriarchs,  25  Archbishops,  168  Bishops, 
7  Abbots,  7  Generals  of  Orders,  and  39  who  were  absent  represented 
by  their  proctors. 


Results  of  the  Council  685 


With  the  close  of  the  Council  of  Trent  the  determination  of  the 
principles  which  were  to  regulate  the  reorganisation  of  the  Catholic 
Church  was  completed.  There  followed,  under  the  direction  of  the 
Papacy,  an  application  and  working  out  in  detail  of  those  principles, 
which  was  a  task  of  many  years  ;  but  the  struggle  was  over  and  the  battle 
won.  Medieval  theology  had  been  emphatically  restated.  The  scission 
of  Christendom  into  two  halves,  each  going  its  own  way  regardless  of  tlie 
other,  was  definitely  confirmed.  The  spirit  of  dogmatic  certainty,  which 
drew  its  chief  nourishment  from  Spanish  soil  and  of  which  the  Society  of 
Jesus  was  the  clearest  expression,  was  to  be  the  predominating  influence 
for  the  future  in  the  Church.  Her  doctrine  was  now  completely  articu- 
lated for  the  first  time.  Matters  which  the  medieval  Church  liad  left  to 
the  speculations  of  the  Schools  were  now  authoritatively  settled  ;  and  tlie 
Church  was  provided  with  a  logical  presentation  of  her  position,  definitely 
marking  it  off  from  all  other  circles  of  ideas.  The  issues  had  been  put 
before  the  world,  and  it  remained  for  Catholicism  and  Protestantism  to 
fight  the  battle  to  the  bitter  end. 

Though  the  triumph  of  the  Counter-Reformation  thus  enabled  the 
Church  to  present  a  united  front  as  against  Protestantism,  it  is  not  true  that 
all  opposition  to  the  prevailing  tendencies  within  the  Church  had  been 
silenced.  Many  of  the  dogmatic  decrees  of  Trent  were  as  such  a 
compromise.  The  great  decree  on  Justification  preserved  room  in  the 
Church  for  those  Augustinian  ideas  which  the  Church  had  never  been 
completely  able  to  assimilate,  and  which  found  subsequent  expression  in 
Jansenism.  Great  as  was  the  influence  of  the  Jesuits  at  Trent,  they  did 
not  succeed  in  winning  a  complete  triumph  for  their  theology.  This  was 
not,  however,  of  so  great  consequence  as  might  appear  ;  for  all  particular 
dogmas  were  beginning  to  sink  into  the  background,  compared  with  the 
one  great  principle  that  the  use  and  wont  of  the  Roman  Churcli  is  law, 
and  that  to  the  Pope  alone  appertains  the  right  to  expound  the  teacliing 
of  the  Church.  The  complete  expression  of  this  principle  was  impossible 
at  Trent  ;  the  hostile  elements  were  too  strong  ;  but  the  way  was  laid 
open.  The  papal  supremacy  over  the  Church  received  a  new  extension  as 
the  result  of  the  work  of  the  Council.  The  confirmation  of  the  Pope 
was  acknowledged  to  be  necessary  for  the  validation  of  its  decrees.  The 
supreme  power  in  the  universal  Church  was  admitted  to  rest  in  the 
Roman  Pontiffs.  They  were  the  Vicars  of  Christ  on  earth.  The 
attempt  to  enunciate  tlie  direct  divine  authority  of  tlie  episcopate  was 
frustrated.  The  Vaticanum  was  only  the  logical  outcome  of  certain 
elements  in  the   Tridentinum. 

The  decrees  on  reformation  successfully  removed  the  woi-st  al)ns(>s 
which  had  brought  the  Church  and  the  clergy  into  contempt.  'Hie 
authority  of  the  Bishops  over  their  clergy,  both  secular  and  regular,  was 
consideralily  strengthened  ;  and  means  were  provided  for  the  removal  of 
evil  livers  and  the  incompetent.     The  parochial  clergy  were  compelled  to 


686        Acceptance  and  carrying  out  of  the  decrees     [1564-88 

preach  ;  and  the  whole  discipline  of  the  Church  was  improved.  The 
practical  reform,  however,  that  was  most  far-reaching  in  its  results  was 
probably  the  establishment  of  seminaries  for  the  education  of  the  clerg}^ 
in  each  diocese.  This  measure  provided  the  Church  with  an  adequate 
supply  of  trained  men  for  its  service,  and  removed  the  reproach  which 
had  formerly  rested  on  the  clerical  state.  At  the  same  time  it  made  the 
clergy  a  body  more  distinct  from  the  laity  than  they  had  ever  been 
before.  It  narrowed  the  interests  of  the  clergy,  and  made  them  to  a 
considerable  extent  the  blind  instruments  of  their  superiors.  Together 
with  the  system  of  celibacy,  it  separated  the  clergy  from  the  ordinary 
social  life  of  the  people,  and  accentuated  the  division  between  the 
Church  and  the  modern  world. 

The  Council  left  to  the  Papacy  the  right  of  interpreting  its  decrees  ; 
and  Pius  IV  hastened  to  enunciate  this  principle  in  the  Bull  Beyiedictus 
I)eus  (January  26, 1564),  which  confirmed  its  proceedings.  No  prelate 
was  to  publish  any  gloss  upon  the  decrees  of  the  Council  or  venture  to 
interpret  them  without  papal  authorisation.  In  1588  Sixtus  V  set  up  a 
special  Congregation  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  to  supervise  the  carry- 
ing out  of  its  decisions.  Meanwhile  the  Papacy  anxiously  endeavoured 
to  persuade  the  Catholic  Powers  to  accept  in  their  entirety  the  decrees 
of  the  Council  ;  but  with  the  decrees  on  doctrine  governments  did  not 
concern  themselves.  They  were  accepted  throughout  the  Catholic  Church, 
but  with  the  decrees  on  discipline  it  was  different.  Even  in  the  modified 
form  which  they  received  after  the  protests  of  the  ambassadors,  they 
infringed  many  ancient  rights  of  the  secular  power  in  various  countries, 
rights  which  it  was  not  likely  would  be  easily  abandoned.  In  the  end 
the  decrees  on  discipline  were  only  accepted  in  their  entirety  by  the 
Emperor  Ferdinand  for  his  hereditary  dominions,  by  Portugal,  and  by 
the  King  of  Poland.  France  and  the  Empire  never  accepted  them, 
while  Spain  and  Venice  received  them  with  a  reservation  of  their  own 
rights  which  had  practically  the  same  effect.  There  were  limits  beyond 
which  no  modern  State  could  allow  the  papal  claims  to  go. 

The  tasks  which  the  Council  had  left  to  the  Pope  were  actively  taken 
in  hand.  The  Breviary  and  the  Missal  were  revised,  and  a  new  edition 
of  the  Corpus  Juris  Canonici  was  published.  A  purification  of  Church 
music  was  begun.  A  commission  of  eight  Cardinals  was  appointed  on 
August  2,  1564  ;  and  in  Palestrina  a  genius  arose  who  became  the 
founder  of  modern  Church  music.  His  famous  Missa  di  Papa  Mar- 
cello,  performed  before  the  commission  on  April  28,  1565,  subordinated 
the  music  to  the  words,  and  substituted  a  dignified  and  masterly 
simplicity  for  the  florid  and  decadent  style  which  had  hitherto  charac- 
terised ecclesiastical  music  in  Rome.  The  most  important  task  left  to 
the  Papacy  was  however  the  preparation  of  an  Index  of  Prohibited  Books. 
So  early  as  1479  Sixtus  IV  had  empowered  the  University  of  Cologne 
to  inflict  penalties  on  printers,  purchasers,  and  readers  of  heretical  books. 


1515-96]  The  Index  of  Prohibited  Books  687 

This  was  confirmed  and  extended  by  the  Bull  Inter  multiplices  of  Alex- 
ander VI  in  1501.  At  the  fifth  Lateran  Leo  X  in  1515  authorised 
the  Master  of  the  Sacred  Palace  to  act  as  censor  in  Rome  and  the  papal 
States ;  and  the  Inquisition  in  1543  began  to  regard  the  censorship  as 
one  of  its  functions.  The  first  lists  of  prohibited  books  were  however 
drawn  up  in  1546  and  1550  at  Louvain,  in  1549  at  Cologne,  and  by 
the  Sorbonne  between  1544  and  1551.  The  first  papal  Index  was  that 
of  Paul  IV,  which  was  published  in  1559.  It  was  arranged  alphabeti- 
cally, but  under  each  letter  came  three  categories.  The  first  class 
consisted  of  the  heresiarchs,  all  of  whose  writings  were  prohibited. 
This  was  a  mere  list  of  names.  The  second  class  consisted  of  writers, 
some  of  whose  productions,  which  were  enumerated,  tended  to  heresy, 
impiety,  magic,  or  immorality.  The  third  class  consisted  of  writings, 
chiefly  anonymous,  which  were  unwholesome  in  doctrine.  The  Index  of 
Paul  IV  met  with  much  opposition ;  and  Naples,  Milan,  Florence,  and 
Venice  refused  to  print  or  enforce  it.  Pius  IV  modified  it  in  1561  by 
allowing  the  use  of  non-Catholic  editions  of  the  Fathers  and  other 
inoffensive  writings  to  licensed  readers,  provided  comments  by  heretics 
of  the  first  class  had  been  previously  erased.  No  Index  ExpurgatoriuB, 
however,  as  distinguished  from  an  Index  Librorum  Prohibitorum^  was  ever 
published  officially  at  Rome.  The  harder  work  of  pointing  out  particular 
passages  which  must  be  deleted  was  only  undertaken  in  Spain.  The 
Papacy  contented  itself  with  prohibiting  books  altogether  or  with  a 
^^  donee  corrigatur,''  of  which  nothing  came. 

The  Index  Librorum  Proliibitorum  of  Paul  IV  was  however  con- 
demned at  Trent  as  a  bad  piece  of  work  ;  and  a  commission  was  appointed 
to  revise  it.  Ten  rules  to  be  observed  were  drawn  up,  but  the  work 
itself  was  left  to  the  Papacy.  The  new  Index  was  published  by  the 
Papacy  in  March,  1564,  and  is  known  as  the  Tridentine  Index.  The 
Index  of  Paul  IV  was  improved,  and  some  of  its  worst  blunders  removed. 
It  was  accepted  by  Portugal,  Belgium,  Bavaria,  and  parts  of  Italy.  In 
1571  Pius  V  set  up  a  special  Congregation  of  the  Index  distinct  from 
the  Inquisition  ;  and  in  1588  this  body  was  empowered  by  Sixtus  V  to 
undertake  further  revision  of  the  Index.  Twenty-two  new  rules  took 
the  place  of  the  ten  laid  down  at  Trent;  and  this  new  Index  was 
published  in  1590.  Shortly  after  its  publication,  however,  Sixtus  V 
died ;  and  Clement  VIII  restored  the  Tridentine  rules  and  issued  another 
Index  in  1596.  The  materials  collected  for  the  Index  of  1590  were 
used,  though  the  Spanish  Index  of  Quiroga  published  in  1584  was  one 
of  the  chief  sources.  The  Index  of  1596  remained  the  standard,  though 
additions  were  made  to  it,  until  the  middle  of  the  eigliteenth  century. 

So  far  as  the  southern  nations  were  concerned  the  Index  achieved  its 
work.  The  peoples  who  continued  to  adhere  to  the  Catholic  Church 
were  cut  off  from  the  culture  and  science  of  the  North,  and  a  serious 
blow  was  dealt  to  human  progress.     It  was  impossible  for  such  measures 


688  The  new  Catholicism 

to  succeed  ultimately ;  but  for  a  time  at  any  rate  they  were  a  serious 
hindrance  to  the  advance  of  knowledge.  The  learned  Jesuit  Canisius, 
in  a  striking  letter  written  to  the  Duke  of  Bavaria  in  1581,  printed  in 
Reusch's  great  history  of  the  Index,  pointed  out  the  futility  of  such 
measures.  Repression  by  Edicts  and  Indexes  could  never  succeed ;  con- 
struction was  needed  as  well  as  destruction,  and  good  authors  must  be 
provided  to  take  the  place  of  bad.  A  revival  of  Catholic  scholarship, 
such  as  Canisius  advocated,  marked  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century,  a 
revival  in  which  his  own  Order  played  a  prominent  part.  Rome  became 
again  a  centre  of  Christian  learning ;  and  the  Annals  of  Baronius  were 
worthy  to  stand  by  the  Centuries  of  Magdeburg.  New  editions  of  the 
Fathers  were  prepared.  In  1587  appeared  the  Roman  edition  of  the 
Septuagint,  and  both  Sixtus  V  and  Clement  VIII  endeavoured  to  imjorove 
the  text  of  the  Vulgate.  Historical  scholarship  ceased  to  be  the  monopoly 
of  one  party.  The  Jesuits  were  the  equals  in  learning  of  their  adver- 
saries and  their  educational  system  was  immeasurably  superior.  Pro- 
testantism in  Germany  was  torn  asunder  by  petty  feuds  ;  and  by  sheer 
force  of  superior  ability  and  unremitting  labour  Catholicism  was  restored, 
first  in  the  Rhine  lands  and  then  on  the  Danube.  The  story  of  this 
work,  the  success  of  which  drove  Protestantism  to  desperation  and 
assisted  to  provoke  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  is  beyond  our  scope.  It  is 
sufficient  to  notice  here  that  it  was  the  fruit  of  that  new  Catholicism 
which  emerged  triumphant  from  the  Council  of  Trent.  Saintliness  of 
life  and  the  beauty  of  holiness  were  again  exhibited  to  the  world  in  a 
Carlo  Borromeo  and  a  Filippo  Neri ;  while  Protestantism  was  too 
often  sinking  into  a  time-serving  Erastianism  or  developing  an  arid 
scholasticism  of  its  own  which  quenched  the  springs  of  religious  life. 
Increased  centralisation  in  government  and  strict  definition  of  dogma 
made  Catholicism  after  Trent  a  far  more  powerful  fighting  force  than  it 
had  ever  been  before,  but  it  was  only  at  the  price  of  drawing  in  its 
borders  and  limiting  its  sympathies.  There  is  a  curious  likeness  in 
essence,  though  in  forms  of  expression  they  are  poles  asunder,  between 
Puritanism  in  England  and  the  movement  of  which  Caraffa  and  Ignatius 
are  the  typical  representatives  in  the  Roman  Church.  Both  alike  sub- 
ordinate the  wider  interests  of  humanity  to  the  supposed  requirements 
of  religious  faith.  The  sacred  was  rigidly  marked  off  from  the  profane  ; 
and  the  culture  of  the  world  and  its  wisdom  were  banned  and  avoided  as 
evil  in  themselves.  The  world  was  given  up  as  hopeless,  and  the  attempt 
to  separate  its  evil  from  its  good  was  abandoned.  The  work  which 
Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Origen  had  begun  for  the  ancient  Church, 
and  Thomas  Aquinas  and  the  great  Schoolmen  had  achieved  for  the 
Church  of  the  Middle  Ages,  was  not  done  anew  for  the  modern  world. 
The  true  Renaissance  was  not  absorbed  into  the  circle  of  ecclesiastical 
ideas ;  and  the  medieval  conception  of  Catholicity  was  limited  rather 
than  widened.     The  modern  world,  if  not  actually  hostile  to  the  Church, 


End  of  the  Catholic  reform  movement  689 

grew  up  apart  from  it  and  by  its  side  rather  than  under  its  influence. 
The  kingdom  of  intellectual  unity — which  Raffaelle  had  depicted  for 
Julius  II  on  the  walls  of  the  Vatican  —  was  not  realised.  The  leaders 
of  the  Christian  Renaissance  had  not  the  moral  enthusiasm  or  the  force 
of  character  necessary  for  the  task.  As  the  gentle  Andre wes  and  the 
gracious  Falkland  had  to  give  way  before  the  sterner  enthusiasm  and  the 
narrow  pedantry  of  Laud,  which  in  its  turn  fell  before  a  more  single- 
minded  but  still  narrower  creed,  so  Contarini  and  his  associates  abdicated 
the  leadership  to  Ignatius  and  Caraffa.  Neither  Pole  nor  Morone  had 
the  spirit  of  martyrdom  ;  and  freedom  could  not  triumph  without  its  roll 
of  martyrs.  It  was  left  to  the  sects  in  the  future  to  vindicate  the  rights 
of  conscience,  and  to  extort  by  force  from  without  what  liberal  church- 
men had  failed  to  achieve  within  the  Church.  There  was  a  touch  of  the 
dilettante  spirit  in  the  aristocratic  circles  of  the  Catholic  reformers  in 
Italy  at  the  opening  of  the  sixteenth  century  which  paralysed  their 
efforts  and  enervated  their  moral  fibre.  The  movement  was  too  academic 
to  influence  the  world  effectively.  Some  of  its  members  fell  into  the  sins 
which  they  themselves  had  denounced,  and  like  Cortese  ended  their  lives 
in  joining  in  the  hunt  for  benefices.  The  rest  contented  themselves  with 
a  lower  ideal  as  best  they  could,  and  stood  helplessly  aside.  The  Church 
was  reformed  and  underwent  a  moral  regeneration ;  but  religious  and 
intellectual  freedom  were  left  further  off  than  ever.  The  issues  at  stake 
were,  however,  made  clear,  and  the  parties  in  the  great  struggle  were 
definitely  marked  out.  A  modus  vivendi  between  authority  and  liberty 
could  not  be  found.  Neither  would  tolerate  the  other,  and  Europe  was 
doomed  to  be  the  battlefield  of  the  contending  principles.  The  sword 
alone  could  be  the  arbiter. 


C.    M.    H.    II.  ^ 


CHAPTER    XIX 

TEI^DENCIES   OF  EUROPEAN  THOUGHT   IN  THE   AGE   OF 
THE   REFORMATION 

When  the  sixteentli  century  opens,  the  West,  with  the  exception  of 
Italy,  is  still  medieval,  distinguished  by  a  superficial  uniformity  of  mind, 
thinking  ideas  which  it  has  ceased  to  believe  and  using  a  learned  tongue 
which  it  can  hardly  be  said  to  understand.  When  the  century  closes, 
the  West,  with  the  possible  exception  of  Italy,  now  fallen  as  far  to  the 
rear  as  she  once  stood  in  the  van,  has  become  modern ;  its  States  have 
developed  what  we  may  term  a  personal  consciousness  and  an  individual 
character,  have  created  a  vernacular  literature  and  a  native  art,  and  have 
faced  new  problems  which  they  seek  by  the  help  of  their  new  tongues  to 
state  and  to  solve.  In  Spain,  the  land  of  ancestral  and  undying  pride,  the 
humours  of  a  decayed  chivalry  have  been  embodied  in  a  tale  which  moves 
to  laughter  without  ever  provoking  to  contempt.  In  Portugal  the  navi- 
gators have  created  afresh  the  epic  feeling  ;  a  new  Iliad  has  been  begotten, 
where  swifter  ships  plough  a  vaster  sea  than  was  known  to  the  ancient 
Greeks,  where  braver  heroes  than  Agamemnon  do  battleagainstamightier 
Troy,  while  travellers  fare  to  remoter  and  stranger  lands  than  those  visited 
by  Odysseus.  In  France,  where  the  passion  for  unity  is  beginning  to 
work  like  madness  in  the  brain,  Rabelais  speaks  in  his  mother  tongue  the 
praises  of  the  new  learning ;  Montaigne  makes  it  the  vehicle  of  the  new 
temper  and  its  cultured  doubt  ;  Clement  Marot  uses  it  to  sing  the  Psalms 
of  the  ancient  Hebrew  race ;  John  Calvin  to  defend  and  commend  his 
strenuous  faith ;  while  Descartes,  born  in  this  century  though  writing  in  the 
next,  states  his  method,  defines  his  problem,  and  determines  the  evolution 
of  modern  philosoph}^  in  the  language  of  the  people  as  well  as  in  that 
of  the  learned.  In  England  the  century  began  in  literary  poverty,  but  it 
ended  in  the  unapproached  wealth  of  the  Elizabethan  age.  In  Germany, 
where  the  main  intellectual  interest  was  theological  and  confessional, 
Martin  Luther  gave  the  people  hymns  that  often  sound  like  echoes  of 
the  Hebrew  Psalter ;  Kepler,  listening  to  the  music  which  nature  reserves 
for  the  devout  ear,  discovered  the  unity  which  moves  through  her  ap- 
parent disorder  ;  and  Jakob  Boehme,  though  but  a  cobbler,  had  visions 
of  higher  mysteries  than  the  proud  can  see.     The  Netherlands  j)roved 


Religion  and  jtldlosoplnj  (391 

their  heroism  in  their  struggle  for  independence,  and  their  love  of 
knowledge  in  the  tolerant  reasonableness  that  made  them  a  home  for 
the  persecuted  of  all  lands.  In  Scotland  William  Dunbar,  Gawin 
Douglas,  and  David  Lindsay  shed  lustre  upon  the  early  decades  of  the 
century,  while  in  its  later  years  Reformers  like  Knox  and  scholars  like 
Andrew  Melville  trained  up  a  people  who  had  imagination  enough  to 
love  and  achieve  liberty  without  neglecting  letters.  Tlie  thought 
which  at  once  effected  and  reflected  so  immense  a  revolution  can  be 
here  traced  only  in  the,  broadest  outlines. 

We  are  met  at  the  tlireshold  by  a  two-fold  difficulty  —  one  which 
concerns  the  included  thought,  and  another  which  concerns  the  thought 
excluded.  The  sixteenth  century  is  great  in  religion  rather  than  philo- 
sophy, and  stands  in  remarkable  contrast  to  its  immediate  successor, 
which  is  great  in  philosophy  rather  than  religion.  With  the  latter,  the 
great  modern  intellectual  systems  may  be  said  to  begin  ;  and  to  it  belong 
such  names  as  Bacon  and  Descartes,  Ilobbes  and  Locke,  Spinoza  and 
Leibniz,  Gassendi  and  Malebranche.  But  without  the  earlier  century 
the  later  would  have  been  without  its  problems  and  therefore  without 
its  thinkers.  The  pre-eminence  of  the  one  in  religion  involved  the  pre- 
eminence of  the  other  in  thought;  for  what  exercises  the  spirit  tends 
to  emancipate  speculation  and  raises  issues  that  reason  must  discuss  and 
resolve  before  it  can  be  at  peace  with  itself  and  its  world.  Hence  the 
thought  Avhose  course  we  have  to  follow  is  thought  in  transition,  deal- 
ing with  the  old  questions,  yet  waking  to  the  new,  quickened  by  what  is 
behind  to  enquire  into  what  is  within  and  foreshadow  what  is  before. 
But,  while  the  thought  that  is  to  concern  us  may  thus  be  described  as 
moving  in  the  realm  of  our  ultimate  religious  ideas,  the  thought  that  is 
not  to  concern  us  moves  in  the  realm  of  political  and  social  theory. 
The  two  realms  touch,  indeed,  and  even  interpenetrate ;  yet  they  are 
distinct.  The  ideal  of  human  society  is  a  religious  ideal ;  but  it  is  a 
consequence  or  a  combination  of  religious  ideas  rather  than  one  of  the 
ideas  themselves.  Hence,  though  certain  of  the  most  potent  thinkers 
of  the  sixteenth  century  occupied  themselves  with  the  constitution  and 
order  of  human  society,  with  the  actual  or  ideal  State  both  in  itself 
and  in  relation  to  the  actual  or  ideal  Church,  yet  they  must  here  be 
rigorously  excluded,  and  our  view  confined  to  the  thought  that  had  to 
do  with  the  religious  interpretation  of  man  and  his  Universe. 

It  is  customary  to  distinguish  the  Renaissance,  as  the  revival  of 
letters,  from  the  Reformation  as  the  revival  of  religion.  But  the 
distinction  is  neither  formally  correct  nor  materially  exact.  The 
Renaissance  was  not  necessarily  secular  and  classical  —  it  might  be, 
and  often  was,  both  religious  and  Christian ;  nor  was  the  Reformation 
essentially  religious  and  moral  —  it  might  be  and  often  was  political 
and  secular.     Of  the  two  revivals  the  one  is  indeed  in  point  of  time 


692  Latin  and  Teuton 


the  elder ;  but  the  elder  is  not  so  much  a  cause  as  simply  an  antecedent 
of  the  younger.  Both  revivals  were  literary  and  interpretative,  both 
were  imitative  and  re-creative  ;  but  they  differed  in  spirit,  and  they 
differed  also  in  province  and  in  results.  There  was  a  revival  of  letters 
which  could  not  possibly  become  a  reformation  of  religion,  and  there  was 
a  revival  which  necessarily  involved  such  a  reformation  ;  and  the  two  re- 
vivals must  be  distinguished  if  the  consequences  are  to  be  understood. 

The  roots  of  the  difference  may  be  found,  partly,  in  the  minds  that 
studied  the  literatures,  and  j^artly  in  the  literatures  they  studied,  though 
even  here  the  qualities,  the  interests,  and  the  motives  of  the  minds  only 
stand  the  more  clearly  revealed.  The  difference  is  better  expressed  b}^  a 
racial  than  by  a  temporal  distinction  ;  the  term  "  race,"  indeed,  as  here 
used  does  not  denote  a  unity  of  blood,  which  can  seldom  if  ever  exist, 
but  unities  of  language,  inheritance,  association,  and  ideas.  In  this 
sense,  the  Catholic  South  was  in  speech,  in  custom,  in  social  temper,  in 
political  and  municipal  institutions  distinctly  Latin  ;  and  for  similar 
reasons  the  Protestant  North  may  be  termed  Teutonic.  Now  of  these 
two  the  Latin  race  was  in  thought  the  more  secular,  while  the  Teutonic 
was  the  more  religious  ;  but  as  regards  custom  and  institutions  the 
Latin  peoples  were  the  more  conservative,  while  the  Teutonic  were  the 
more  inclined  to  radical  change.  And  this  is  a  difference  which  their 
respective  histories  may  in  some  measure  explain.  The  Latin  race, 
especially  in  Italy,  was  the  heir  of  the  Roman  Empire,  still  a  vivid 
memory  and  a  living  influence  ;  its  monuments  survived,  its  paganism 
had  not  utterly  perished  ;  its  gods  were  still  named  in  popular  speech ; 
customs  which  it  had  sanctioned  and  dreams  which  it  had  begotten 
persisted,  having  refused,  as  it  were,  to  undergo  Christian  baptism. 
Italy  was  to  the  Latins  as  much  a  holy  land  as  Palestine  had  been  to 
the  Crusaders,  with  graves  and  relics  and  shrines  lying  in  every  valley 
and  looking  out  from  every  hill  ;  and  these  appealed  all  the  more  to  the 
imagination  since  ecclesiastical  Rome  was  a  reality  and  imperial  Rome 
a  memory  and  a  dream.  The  Eternal  City  was  like  a  desolate  widow 
who  yet  tarried  and  yearned  for  the  return  of  the  Caesar  who  had  been 
her  spouse. 

And  if  Rome  lived  in  the  dust  of  her  ancient  roads  and  the  ruins  of 
her  temples,  the  Italian  peoples  and  States  seemed  singularly  suggestive 
of  Greece.  Their  republics  and  tyrants,  their  civic  life  and  military  ad- 
venturers, their  rich  cities  with  their  colonies  and  commerce,  their  rapid 
changes  of  fortune,  their  swift  oscillations  from  freedom  to  bondage 
and  from  bondage  back  to  freedom,  their  love  of  art  and  of  letters,  their 
mutual  jealousies  and  ambitions,  were  Greek  rather  than  Roman  ;  indeed 
at  certain  moments  they  might  almost  make  us  feel  as  if  ancient  Greece 
had  risen  from  the  dead  and  come  to  live  upon  the  Italian  soil.  Here 
then  the  Renaissance  could  not  but  be  classical  :  not  the  product  of  some 
accident  like  the  capture  of  a  city  or  the  fall  of  an  ancient  dynasty, 


Latin  and  Teuton  693 


but  the  inevitable  outcome  of  minds  quickened  by  the  Italian  air  and 
made  creative  b}-  the  vision  of  a  vast  inheritance.  The  Teutonic  mind, 
on  the  contrary,  had  no  classical  world  behind  it  ;  its  pagan  past  was 
remote,  dark,  infertile,  without  art  or  literature,  or  philosophy,  or 
history,  or  any  dream  of  a  universal  empire  which  had  once  held  sway 
over  civilised  man.  In  a  word,  its  conscious  life,  its  social  being,  its 
struggles  for  empire  and  towards  civilisation,  its  chivalry,  its  crusades, 
its  mental  problems  and  educational  processes,  all  stood  rooted  in  the 
Christian  religion.  Behind  this  the  memory  of  men  did  not  go,  and 
into  the  darkness  beyond  the  eye  could  as  little  penetrate  as  the  vision 
of  the  man  can  trace  the  growth  of  knowledge  in  his  own  infant  mind. 

Now  these  differing  conditions  made  it  as  natural  that  the  Teutonic 
Renaissance  should  concern  itself  with  the  early  Christian  ideal  as  that 
the  Latin  should  with  the  ancient  classical  literature  ;  and,  where  they 
touched  religion,  that  the  one  should  be  more  occupied  with  its  intellectual 
side  and  the  other  with  its  institutional ;  for  where  the  Roman  Empire 
had  lived  the  Roman  Church  now  governed.  Tlie  literature  which  the 
Teutonic  mind  mainly  loved  and  studied  and  edited  was  patristic  and 
Christian  ;  but  the  literature  which  the  Latin  mind  chiefly  cultivated 
was  classical  and  pagan.  The  Latin  taught  the  Teuton  how  to  read,  to 
edit,  and  to  handle  ancient  books  ;  but  nature  taught  both  of  them  the 
logic  that  binds  together  letters  and  life.  As  a  consequence,  the  Latin 
Renaissance  became  an  attempt  to  think  again  the  thoughts,  and  live 
again  the  life,  embalmed  in  the  literature  of  Greece  and  Rome  ;  while 
the  German  Renaissance  became  an  attempt  to  reincarnate  the  apostolical 
mind.  The  Latin  tendency  was  towards  classical  Naturalism,  but  the 
Teutonic  tendency  was  towards  the  ideals  of  the  Scriptures,  both  Hebrew 
and  Greek.  Among  the  Latins  almost  every  philosophical  system  of 
antiquity  reappeared,  though  in  an  instructively  inverted  order  ;  but 
among  the  Teutons  the  field  was  occupied  by  theologies  based  on 
Augustine  and  Paul,  while  philosophy  began  as  an  interpretation,  not 
of  literary  thought  or  societies,  but  of  man,  individual  and  social,  as 
he  had  lived  and  was  living. 

Hence,  in  the  region  of  belief  the  Latins  were  the  more  critical  and 
the  Teutons  the  more  positive.  The  thought  which  the  Latins  studied 
was  that  of  a  world  into  which  Christ  had  not  entered,  though  it  was 
one  in  which  Caesar  had  reigned  ;  but  the  tliought  which  the  Teutons 
cultivated  had  Christ  as  its  source  and  God  as  its  supreme  object.  The 
Latin  Renaissance  thus  produced  two  most  dissimilar  yet  cognate 
phenomena  :  intellectual  systems  affecting  mainly  tlie  notion  of  Deity, 
and  Orders  like  the  Society  of  Jesus,  organised  for  the  work  of  con- 
servation and  reaction.  On  the  other  hand,  the  parallel  phenomena 
produced  by  the  Teutonic  Renaissance  were  attempts  either  to  revive  the 
religion  of  the  apostolic  literature,  or  to  found  tlie  Protestant  Churches 
and  States.     What  concerns  us  here  is  the  new  thought,  and  not  the 


694       Influence  of  Lorenzo  Valla  on  the  Reformers 

new  organisations  ;  and  tliese  preliminary  distinctions  and  discussions 
will  enable  us  to  set  the  Latin,  or  Classical  Renaissance,  in  its  true 
relation  to  the  Teutonic  or  religious. 

We  begin  with  the  most  obvious  of  the  influences  exercised  by  the 
Revival  of  Letters  upon  the  thought  of  the  sixteenth  century,  viz., 
those  concerned  with  grammar  and  what  it  signified,  and  with  language 
as  the  creation  and  the  interpreter  of  thought.  It  has  often  been  said 
that  the  Church  preserved  the  knowledge  of  Latin  as  a  living  tongue  ; 
but  Lorenzo  Valla  (1406-57)  would  have  said,  if  the  tongue  were  still 
alive  it  were  better  dead.  As  a  grammarian  Valla  held  grammar  to  be 
higher  than  dialectic,  for  it  took  as  many  years  to  learn  as  dialectic 
took  months  ;  and  he  may  be  said  to  have  discovered  literary  and 
historical  criticism  by  executing  with  its  help  judgment  on  three  famous 
documents,  viz.,  the  Vulgate,  which  he  condemned  as  faulty  in  style  and 
incorrect  in  translation  ;  the  Donation  of  Constantine,  which  he  proved 
by  its  anachronisms  to  be  late  and  false  and  forged  ;  and  the  Apostolic 
Symbol,  whose  terms  and  clauses  he  showed  could  not  be  of  apostolic 
origin.  His  criticism  of  these  documents  (we  omit  all  reference  to  that 
of  the  pseudo-Dionysius)  was  prophetic  and  more  potent  in  a  later 
generation  than  in  his  own.  Erasmus  published  in  1505  the  Annota- 
tiones  on  the  Vulgate,  and  in  a  dedication  which  served  as  a  preface  he 
compared  Valla  as  a  grammarian  and  Nicolas  of  Lyra  as  a  theologian  ; 
and  he  argued  from  the  errors  which  had  been  proved  to  exist  in  the 
version  which  the  Church  had  in  a  sense  canonised  by  use,  in  a  way 
that  was  at  once  an  apology  and  a  call  for  his  own  edition  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament  nine  years  before  it  appeared.  In  1517  a  copy  of  the 
De  Donatione  Constantini  Magyii  came  into  the  hands  of  LTlrich  von 
Hutten,  who  published  it,  and  with  his  usual  careless  audacity  dedicated 
it  to  the  Pope,  whom  he  straightway  proceeded  to  denounce  as  a  usurper 
and  robber.  Later  this  was  sent  to  Luther  just  as  he  was  meditating 
his  De  Captivitate  Babylonica  Eeclesiae  ;  and  it  strengthened  his  trust  in 
the  German  people,  confirmed  him  in  the  belief  that  the  Pope  was 
Antichrist,  and  fortified  him  for  the  daring  deed  of  burning  the  Pope's 
Bull.  The  criticism  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  indicated  a  method  of 
discussing  dogma  which  only  needed  to  be  applied  to  become  a  theory  of 
development  capable  of  dissolving  the  vast  systems  of  the  traditional 
schools.  We  need  not  be  surprised  that  Calvin  speaks  of  Valla  as  "  an 
acute  and  judicious  man,  and  an  instrument  of  the  Divine  Will." 

The  Italian  mind  was  simple  in  spite  of  all  its  subtle  complexity,  and 
in  the  Renaissance  it  was  like  the  explorer  who  set  out  to  find  a  new  way 
to  India  and  found  a  new  world  instead.  It  had  no  more  typical  son 
than  Giovanni  Pico  della  Mirandola.  He  was  —  if  we  are  to  believe  his 
nephew  and  biographer  —  chivalrous,  beautiful,  radiant,  a  man  it  was 
impossible  to  see  without  loving,  an  artist  who  loved  art,  a  thinker  who 


Mysticism.  —  Pico  and  Reuchlin  695 

delighted  in  thought,  a  seeker  whose  passion  it  was  to  find  the  truth, 
and  who  would  gladl}^  have  sold  all  he  possessed  to  buy  it.  Born  in  1463, 
he  studied  Canon  Law  at  Bologna ;  then,  first  at  Padua,  and  later  at 
Paris,  he  cultivated  philosophy.  AVhen  only  twenty-one  lie  returned  to 
Italy  and  read  Plato  in  Florence  under  Ficino ;  three  years  later  he 
travelled  to  Rome,  where  he  drew  up  nine  hundred  tlieses,  philosophical 
and  theological,  which  lie  offered  to  discuss  with  the  scholars  of  all  lands, 
promising,  if  they  came,  to  bear  the  cost  of  their  journey.  But  heresy 
was  discovered  in  some  of  the  theses,  and  the  disputation  was  prohibited. 
Later  he  devoted  himself  to  a  contemplative  life,  renounced  the  world, 
divided  his  goods  between  his  nephew  and  the  poor,  saying  that,  once  he 
had  finished  the  studies  which  he  had  undertaken,  he  should  wander 
barefoot  round  the  world  in  order  that  he  might  preach  Christ.  He 
was  a  mystic ;  nature  was  to  him  a  parable,  history  was  an  allegory, 
and  every  sensuous  thing  an  emblem  of  the  Divine.  He  magnified  man, 
though  he  distrusted  self ;  and  as  he  believed  that  truth  came  only  by 
revelation  he  felt  bound  to  seek  it  from  those  who  had  thus  received  it 
from  God.  Hence  he  searched  for  truth,  successively  in  Aristotle,  in 
Plato,  in  Plotinus,  and  in  the  pseudo-Dionysius,  who  seemed  to  many, 
even  after  Valla  had  written,  the  source  of  the  highest  and  purest  truth. 
But  as  Pico  said,  philosophy  seeks  truth,  theology  finds  it,  but  religion 
possesses  it ;  and  the  truth  which  religion  possesses  is  God's.  Man  can 
best  discover  it  in  the  place  where  God  has  been  pleased  to  set  it. 

Now,  in  his  quest  for  truth  and  its  purest  sources,  Pico  heard  of 
the  Cabbala,  and  conceived  it  to  be  the  depository  of  the  most  ancient 
wisdom,  the  tradition  of  the  aboriginal  revelation  granted  to  man.  And 
just  then  John  Reuchlin,  German  mystic  and  scholar,  found  Pico.  He 
was  older  in  years  but  younger  in  mind.  He  had  studied  philology  in 
Paris,  law  in  Orleans,  and  he  had  lectured  on  Greek  in  Tiibingen  ;  he 
was  then  on  his  second  visit  to  Italy,  with  all  the  mystic  in  him  alive 
and  unsatisfied.  The  God  whom  he  wanted,  the  logic  of  the  Schools 
could  not  give  him ;  by  their  help  he  might  transcend  created  existence, 
though  even  then  what  they  led  him  to  was  only  the  boundless  sea  of 
negation.  In  Aristotle  the  impossible,  in  Plato  the  incredible,  was 
emphasised;  but  in  the  region  of  spirit  things  were  necessary  which 
thought  found  impossible  or  reason  pronounced  incredible.  The  Neo- 
Pythagorean  School  saved  Reuchlin  from  the  tyranny  of  the  syllogism 
and  restored  his  faith.  In  this  mood  he  came  to  Pico,  and  to  his  mood 
the  Cabbala  appealed;  its  pliilosophy  was  a  symbolical  theology  which 
invested  words  and  numbers,  letters  and  names,  things  and  persons,  with 
a  divine  sense.  But  Reuchlin  was  more  than  a  mystic  with  a  passion  for 
fantastic  mysteries  ;  he  was  also  a  scholar  ;  and  the  idea  that  there  were 
truths  locked  up  in  Hebrew,  the  tongue  which  God  Himself  had  spoken 
at  the  Creation  and  which  He  had  then  given  to  man,  compelled  him  to 
learn  the  language  that  he  might  read  the  thought  in  the  words  of 


696  Epistolae  obscnrorum  viroriim 

Deity.  So  he  put  himself  to  school  under  a  Jewish  physician,  acquired 
enough  Hebrew  to  pursue  his  studies  independently,  and,  as  a  result, 
published  in  1506  his  De  Rudimentis  Hehraicis.  He  himself  named 
this  book  a  monumentum  aere  perennius,  and  history  has  justified  the 
name.  It  helped  to  define  and  determine  the  religious  tendencies  in 
Teutonic  humanism,  to  change  the  fanciful  mysticism  that  had  begotten 
the  book  into  a  spirit  at  once  historical,  critical,  and  sane.  It  practi- 
cally made  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  Christian,  an  original  text  which  could 
be  used  as  a  Court  of  appeal  for  the  correction  of  the  translation  and  of 
the  canon  which  the  usage  of  the  Church  had  accepted  and  endorsed. 
Knowledge  of  the  language  thus  made  the  interpretation  of  the  Old 
Testament  more  historical  and  more  ethical  ;  it  could  now  be  read  as 
little  through  the  Gnosticism  of  the  Cabbala  as  through  the  Roman 
associations  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  event  which  took  the  Old  Testament  out  of  the  hand  of  phantasy 
turned  it  into  an  instrument  of  reform  ;  for  if  it  is  doubtful  whether 
Protestantism  could  have  arisen  without  the  knowledge  of  the  Old 
Testament,  it  is  certain  that  without  it  the  Reformed  Church  could  not 
have  assumed  the  shape  it  took.  In  all  this,  of  course,  specific  dangers 
might  lie  for  the  scholar  who  could  no  longer  freely  use  the  allegorism 
of  Alexandria  to  convey  the  New  Testament  into  the  most  impossible 
places  of  the  Old,  and  who  was  therefore  tempted  to  reverse  the  process 
and  employ  the  language  and  spirit  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  New.  But  these  dangers  were  still  in  the  future  ;  for 
the  present  it  will  be  enough  to  recall  the  story,  told  in  an  earlier 
volume,  of  the  controversy  between  Reuchlin  and  Pfeif erkorn,  and  of  the 
burning  of  Reuchlin's  books  by  the  Inquisition.  In  consequence  of  this 
unjust  treatment,  the  humanists  addressed  a  series  of  letters,  at  once 
eulogistic  and  apologetic,  to  Reuchlin,  which  were  published  in  1514 
under  the  title  Epistolae  clarorum  Virorum.  (The  second  edition  in  1519 
substituted  '-'•  illustrium  "  for  "  clarorum.''''') 

This  book  suggested  to  one  of  the  younger  and  brighter  humanists, 
John  Jager —  better  known  as  Crotus  Rubeanus,  Luther's  "  Crotus  noster 
SMav^ss^mws,"  a  professor  at  Erfurt — a  series  of  imaginary  epistles  writ- 
ten by  vagrant  students  in  the  execrable  dog-Latin  of  the  Schools,  to 
Ortwinus  Gratius,  otherwise  Ortwin  de  Graes,  professor  of  belles  lettres 
at  Cologne,  a  man  whom  Luther  in  his  most  emphatic  and  plain-spoken 
style  described  as  "  poetistam  asiniim,  lupum  rapacem,  si  non  potius 
crocodilum.''^  The  JEpistolae,  while  describing  the  experiences  or  ad- 
ventures of  their  supposed  authors,  —  and  it  is  here  where  the  characters 
so  humorously  reveal  themselves  —  praise  Gratius  as  well  as  the  divines 
and  divinity  of  the  Schools,  and  censure  the  "-poetae  seculares  "  or 
'"'■  juristae''''  who  had  eulogised  Reuchlin.  In  their  composition  various 
scholars  collaborated,  notably  Ulrich  von  Hutten,  then  ablaze  with  the 
enthusiasm  for  Germany  and  the  passion  against  Rome  which  made  the 


Erasmus  697 


strife  a  joy  to  his  soul.  "  The  prison  is  broken,"  he  cried,  "  the  captive 
is  free  and  will  return  no  more  to  bondage."  "  O  century  when  studies 
bloom  and  spirits  awake,  it  is  happiness  to  live  in  thee  !  " 

Strauss  thought  the  Epistolae  a  supreme  work  of  art,  named  them 
"  eine  weltgeschichtliche  Satire,'"'  and  placed  them  alongside  Bon  Quixote, 
since  they  were  pervaded  by  so  excellent  a  humour  as  to  be  higher  and 
better  than  any  merely  satirical  production.  There  is  here  ground  for 
ample  and  radical  differences,  but  on  one  point  there  is  none  —  the  success 
of  the  satire.  It  deceived  the  very  elect ;  the  friars  who  were  satirised 
saw  the  truth  of  the  portrait  and  did  not  feel  its  shame,  even  though 
the  men  of  serious  mind,  who  could  not  be  deceived,  were  offended. 
Erasmus  did  not  love  it ;  nor  did  Luther,  who  said  "  Votuni  probo,  opus 
non  probo,'''  and  named  the  author  '■'■  einen  HansivursV ;  but  it  made 
the  Schoolmen  ridiculous,  and  while  they  were  lauglied  at  Reuchlin  was 
applauded.  He  died  in  1522,  six  years  after  the  Epistolae  had  appeared 
—  the  same  year  in  which  Luther  published  his  New  Testament  — 
sorrowing  over  the  lapse  from  the  Church  and  from  letters  of  his  young 
kinsman,  Melanchthon,  and  over  the  coming  revolution  which  yet  had 
in  him  a  plain  prophet  and  a  main  cause. 

Li  1516,  two  years  after  the  first  volume  of  the  Epistolae,  Erasmus' 
Novum  Instrumentum  appeared.  The  man  himself  we  need  neither  discuss 
nor  describe.  He  was  a  humanist,  that  is,  his  main  interest  was  literature ; 
but  his  humanism  was  German;  that  is,  the  literature  which  mainly  inter- 
ested him  was  religious.  In  an  age  of  great  editors  he  was  the  most 
famous ;  but  he  was  not  a  thinker,  nor  a  man  who  could  seize  or  be  seized 
by  large  ideas  and  turn  them  into  living  and  creative  forces.  His  greatest 
editorial  achievements  were  connected  not  with  the  classics,  where  his 
haste  and  his  agility  of  mind  made  him  often  a  faithless  guide,  but  with 
the  New  Testament  and  the  Fathers  of  the  Church.  Religion  he  loved 
for  the  sake  of  letters  rather  than  letters  for  the  sake  of  religion.  He 
had  a  quick  eye,  a  sharp  pen,  a  fine  humour,  and  could  hold  up  to  man 
andsociety  a  mirror  which  showed  them  as  they  were.  He  was  fastidious 
and  disliked  discomfort,  yet  he  could  make  it  picturesque  and  amusing. 
His  letters  are  like  a  crowded  stage  on  which  his  time  lives  for  ever ;  and 
we  can  hear  and  see  even  as  his  ear  heard  and  as  his  eye  saw.  We  are, 
indeed,  never  allowed  to  forget  that  he  is  a  rather  too  self-conscious 
spectator ;  and  that  while  all  around  him  men  differ  and  he  is  a  main 
cause  of  their  differences,  yet  there  is  nothing  he  more  desires  than  to 
be  left  alone  to  live  as  untroubled  as  if  he  had  no  mind.  He  is  "  so 
thin-skinned  that  a  fly  would  draw  blood  "  ;  yet,  or  possibly  therefore,  he 
is  a  good  hater,  especially  of  the  ignorant  mob,  the  obtuse  and  vulgar 
men  who  could  not  see  or  feel  the  satire  within  the  compliment  or  the 
irony  hidden  in  an  ambiguous  phrase. 

He  is  one  of  the  men  whose  unconscious  revelations  of  himself  have 
a  nameless  charm ;  we  see  him  as  a  student  whose  very  circumstances 


698  The  letters  of  Erasmus 

remind  him  of  his  origin,  ortu8  a  seorto  as  his  enemies  said,  impecunious, 
forced  into  an  Order  he  did  not  love,  thirsting  for  a  knowledge  hard  to 
obtain,  seeking  it  at  home  or  in  Paris,  where  life  is  fast  while  his  clerical 
guardian  is  suspicious  and  his  own  temper  self-indulgent.  Then  we 
are  touched  by  the  early  struggles  of  a  scholar  who  loved  learning  and 
good  living,  and  neither  liked  nor  acquiesced  in  the  poverty  which  seemed 
his  destined  lot,  though  we  may  be  offended  by  his  complaints,  which  are 
too  frequent  to  be  dignified,  and  his  appeals  for  help,  which  are  too 
urgent  to  be  compatible  with  self-respect  as  we  understand  it.  His 
pictures  of  our  gracious  and  spacious  England,  loved  because  it  is  so 
kind  to  the  stranger  —  the  seclusion  and  erudition  of  Oxford,  the  repose 
and  learned  activity  of  Cambridge,  the  regal  Henry,  the  magnificent 
Wolsey,  the  devout  Colet,  the  genial  More,  the  statesmanlike  yet 
thoughtful  Warham,  who  can  rule  the  Church  and  yet  remember  the 
scholars  who  serve  it,  —  are  of  a  sort  which  pleases  the  reader  and  which 
he  loves  to  read.  And  if  he  desires  first-hand  knowledge  of  the  manners 
and  morals  of  a  picturesque  day,  the  miseries  of  the  sea  and  the  comforts 
of  the  shore,  or  the  discomforts  of  continental  travel  with  its  strange 
bedfellows,  crowded  inns,  dirty  linen,  and  unsavoury  food ;  or  of  the 
dignified  society  and  refined  art  of  living  to  be  then  found  in  the  great 
Italian  cities ;  or  of  Rome  and  Roman  society  under  Julius  II,  where  a 
warlike  Pontiff  and  cultured  Cardinals,  the  spirit  of  the  Borgia  and  the 
temper  of  the  Renaissance,  make  the  capital  of  Christendom  an  epitome 
of  the  world  ;  or  of  the  hopes,  the  disappointments,  and  the  sorrows 
of  an  editor  with  a  zeal  for  letters  and  a  passion  for  praise,  who  negotiates 
now  with  mean  and  now  with  open-handed  publishers,  and  stands  be- 
tween three  publics,  one  sympathetic  and  appreciative,  a  second  sus- 
picious and  sore  and  critical,  fearful  lest  he  go  too  far,  and  a  third 
exacting  and  insatiable,  determined  to  compel  him  to  go  much  further 
than  he  wishes ;  or  of  the  Reforming  men  and  movements,  the  strange 
and  tempestuous  Luther,  the  audacious  and  restless  Hutten,  the  moderate 
and  scholarly  Pirkheimer,  the  conciliatory  and  reasonable  Melanchthon, 
the  heroic  and  magnanimous  Zwingli,  the  learned  and  large-minded 
OEcolampadius,  —  then  he  will  find  this  knowledge  superabundantly  in 
this  vivid  and  entertaining  correspondence. 

Yet,  if  we  would  know  Erasmus,  he  must  be  studied  in  his  more 
serious  works,  as  well  as  in  his  letters.  There  we  shall  find  the  clergy  of 
all  grades  from  the  friar  and  the  parish  priest  to  the  Pope,  the  super- 
stitions and  ceremonies,  the  pilgrimages  and  fastings,  the  distinctions 
in  dress  and  food,  the  worship  of  relics  and  of  Saints,  —  pilloried  and 
satirised  and  killed,  at  least  so  far  as  ridicule  can  kill.  And  his  lighter 
moods  express  his  graver  mind ;  and  unless  this  mind  be  known  there 
is  no  person  in  history  to  whom  we  shall  find  it  harder  to  be  just.  He 
is  a  proud  and  a  strong  man,  when  questions  are  at  issue  for  which  he 
supremely  cares;  but  he  will  seem  to  us  indifferent  or  vain  or  weak  where 


His  critical  toork  and  religious  attitude  699 


the  question  is  one  for  which  he  did  not  care,  however  much  we  may 
wish  he  had.  And,  curiously,  where  his  strength  us  well  as  his  weakness 
most  appears  is  in  his  edition  of  the  New  Testament.  The  inaccuracies 
of  his  text,  the  few  and  the  poor  authorities  he  consulted,  the  haste 
of  the  editor,  the  hurry  of  the  publisher,  the  carelessness  of  the  printer, 
and  the  facility  with  which  he  inserted  in  the  third  and  later  editions  a 
text  like  1  John  v.  7,  which  he  had  omitted  in  the  first  and  second,  are 
all  instances  of  weakness  familiar  even  to  the  unlearned. 

But  the  sagacity  —  which  saw  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  a  work 
instinct  with  the  spirit  but  without  the  style  of  Paul,  which  doubted 
whether  John  the  Apostle  were  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse,  Avhich  dis- 
cerned in  Luke  the  Greek  of  a  writer  skilled  in  literature,  which  perceived 
in  the  Gospels  quotations  from  a  memory  which  could  be  at  fault,  or 
which  inferred  textual  errors  even  where  the  authorities  were  agreed  —  is 
characteristic  of  the  honest  scholar  and  indicative  of  the  courageous  man. 
What  is  still  more  significant,  is  the  deliberate  way  in  which  as  an  editor 
and  exegete  he  repeats  the  views  and  reaffirms  the  arguments  of  his  more 
occasional  works.  Stunica  charged  him  with  tlie  impiety  of  casting 
doubt  on  the  claims  and  the  authority  of  the  Roman  See  and  of  denying 
the  j)rimacy  of  Peter.  The  Church,  Erasmus  said,  was  the  congregation 
of  all  men  throughout  the  whole  world  who  agreed  in  the  faith  of  the 
Gospel.  As  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  he  saw  neither  good  nor  use  in  a 
body  imperceptible  to  the  senses  ;  and  he  found  no  place  in  Scripture 
which  said  that  the  Apostles  had  consecrated  bread  and  wine  into  the 
body  and  blood  of  the  Lord.  Heathenism  of  life  and  Judaism  of 
worship  had  come  upon  the  Church  from  the  neglect  of  the  Gospel. 
Ceremonies  were  positive  laws  made  by  Bishops  or  Councils,  Poj)es  or 
Orders  which  could  not  supersede  the  laws  of  nature  or  of  God.  The 
priest  who  wore  a  lay  habit  or  let  his  hair  grow  was  punished  ;  but 
if  he  became  a  debauchee  he  might  yet  remain  a  pillar  of  the  Church. 

These  were  brave  things  for  a  man  so  timid  as  Erasmus  and  so  desirous 
of  standing  well  with  the  authorities  of  the  Church  to  say  ;  and  in  saying 
them  he  was  governed  by  this  historical  idea  :  — things  unknown  to  the 
New  Testament  were  unnecessary  to  the  Christian  religion  ;  what  con- 
tradicted the  mind  of  Christ  or  hindered  the  realisation  of  His  ends  was 
injurious  to  His  Church,  This  idea  determined  the  attitude  of  Erasmus 
both  to  Pvorae  and  to  Protestantism.  He,  indeed,  honestly  believed  that 
where  Lutheranism  reigned  there  literature  perished  ;  and  that  to  restore 
the  knowledge  of  the  New  Testament  was  to  bring  back  the  mind  of 
Christ,  who  was  the  one  teacher  God  had  appointed,  and  therefore  the 
sole  and  supreme  authority  in  His  Church.  Hence,  his  difference  from 
Luther  was  as  inevitable  as  his  difference  from  Rome,  and  more  absolute, 
for  in  the  one  case  he  differed  from  a  man,  in  the  other  from  a  system. 
It  has  often  been  said  that  his  De  lihero  arhitrio  enabled  him  to  express 
his  difference  from  Luther  without  expressing  his  agreement  with  Rome, 


700  Spirit  of  the  Latin  Renaissance 

or  recanting  "  his  earlier  criticism  of  ecclesiastical  abuses."  This  judg- 
ment is  both  prejudiced  and  unjust.  It  is  indeed  certain  that  the  book 
was  written  in  the  desire  to  dissociate  himself  from  Luther,  as  well  as  in 
response  to  the  appeal  to  write  something  against  the  new  heresy  ;  but 
it  is  no  less  certain  that  the  book  expressed  a  point  on  which  Luther's 
scholasticism  offended  the  humanism  of  Erasmus.  The  saying  "  liherum 
arhitrium  esse  nomen  inane  "  seemed  to  him  an  "•  aenigma  absiirdum"  and 
for  this  reason  — it  was  unknown  to  the  New  Testament  and  the  Apostolic 
Church.  It  might  be  Augustinian,  it  certainly  was  scholastic  ;  but  it 
was  neither  Biblical  nor  primitive.  Erasmus,  in  short,  wrote  as  a  Greek 
and  not  as  a  Latin  theologian,  as  a  Classical  scholar  and  not  as  a 
Western  divine.  He  could  not  have  selected  a  point  more  characteristic 
of  his  own  position.  He  would  have  the  Christian  religion  known 
through  its  creative  literature  ;  he  would  not  have  it  identified  with  the 
philosophy  or  theology  of  any  school. 

So  far  we  have  been  occupied  with  the  formal  rather  than  the  material 
side  of  thought ;  now  we  must  consider  the  latter,  or  thought  in  its 
objective  expression  as  at  once  evolved,  governed,  and  served  by  the 
critical  method. 

We  begin  with  the  Latin  Renaissance.  Its  thought  grew  out  of  the 
study  of  Classical  literature,  though  it  reversed  rather  than  followed  the 
sequences  of  the  Classical  mind.  The  one  began  where  the  other  ended, 
in  an  eclectic  Neo-Platonism,  or  a  multitude  of  borrowed  principles 
reduced  by  a  speculation,  more  or  less  arbitrary,  to  a  reasoned  unity  which 
was  yet  superficial  ;  but  it  ended  wdiere  the  other  began,  in  attempts  to 
interpret  the  nature  within  which  man  lived,  with  a  view  to  the  better 
interpretation  of  man.  Though  the  order  of  evolution  was  inverted,  it 
was  yet  in  the  circumstances  the  only  order  possible.  For  the  mind 
which  the  voice  of  literature  awakened  could  only  respond  to  a  voice 
which  was  articulate  and  intelligible.  The  mind  was  old  in  speculation, 
though  its  problems  were  new,  and  its  age  was  reflected  in  the  solutions 
it  successively  attempted  or  accepted.  It  had  been  educated  in  schools 
where  theology  reigned  while  Aristotle  governed  ;  and  it  revolted  from 
the  governing  minister  out  of  loyalty  to  the  reigning  sovereign,  whose 
authority  extended  over  regions  of  too  infinite  variety  to  be  administered 
by  his  narrow  and  rigid  methods. 

The  literature  which  enlarged  the  outlook  changed  the  mind  ;  it 
could  not  think  as  it  had  thought  before  or  believe  as  it  had  believed 
concerning  the  darkness  and  error  of  pagan  antiquity.  The  light  which 
dwelt  in  ancient  philosophy  broke  upon  it  like  an  unexpected  sunrise, 
which  it  saw  with  eyes  that  had  been  accustomed  to  a  grey  and  creeping 
dawn.  And  this  means,  that  Classical  thought  was  seized  at  the  point 
where  it  stood  nearest  to  living  experience,  and  yet  formed  the  most 
expressive  contrast  to  it.     This  point  was  where  philosophy  had  done  its 


Geinistos  Plethon  and  the  Neo-Platonists  701 


best  to  become  a  religion,  and  had  tried  out  of  its  school  to  make  a 
Church.  Hence,  the  new  mind  in  the  first  flush  of  its  awaking  turned  from 
its  ancient  master,  Aristotle,  and  threw  itself  into  the  arms  of  the  Neo- 
Platonists.  Gemistos  Plethon,  who  took  part  in  the  Council  of  Florence, 
1439,  was  intellectually  the  most  potent  of  the  Greeks  who  lielped  in  the 
Renaissance.  He  regarded  Aristotle  as  a  westernised  Mohammedan 
rather  than  as  a  Greek,  a  man  who  had  indeed  once  lived  on  the 
Hellenic  soil,  but  who  had  become  an  alien  in  race  and  an  enemy  in 
religion,  speaking  in  the  Latin  schools  ideas  which  he  owed  to  a  Moorish 
interpreter.  So  Pletlion  expounded  to  the  awakening  West  Plato  as  the 
Neo-Platonists  understood  liim,  "  the  Attic  ]\Ioses,"  the  transmitter  of  a 
golden  tradition  which  the  secular  Aristotle  had  tried  to  break  and 
which  ran  back  through  Pythagoras  to  Zoroaster  on  the  one  hand  and 
Abraham  on  the  other.  His  philosophy  was  at  once  monotheistic 
and  polytheistic  ;  God  was  one  and  infinite,  but  He  acted  by  means  of 
ideas  or  spirits,  or  minor  deities  who  filled  the  space  between  us  and 
Him.  As  first  and  final  cause  He  ordered  all  things  for  the  best, 
and  left  no  room  for  chance  or  accident.  Providence  was  necessity 
and  fate  providence,  the  world  in  all  its  parts  and  life  in  all  its  elements 
were  vehicles  of  a  divine  purpose.  The  soul  of  man  was  immortal  ; 
the  doctrine  of  reminiscence  proved  that  it  had  lived  before  birth  and 
so  could  live  after  death. 

Plethon  emphasised  in  every  possible  way  the  diiferences  between 
Plato  and  Aristotle,  refusing  to  allow  them  to  be  reduced  to  a  mere 
question  of  terminology.  This  teaching  lifted  men  above  the  arid 
syllogisms  of  the  schools,  enriched  their  view  of  themselves  and  nature, 
of  God  and  history,  and  gave  reality  to  the  ancient  saying  "  ex  oriente 
lux.'''  For  it  came  more  as  a  religion  than  as  a  philosophy  ;  even  the 
apparatus  of  worship  was  mimicked  ;  ceremonies  were  instituted,  holy  or 
feast  days  were  observed  ;  celebrities  became  saints,  before  the  bust  of 
Plato  a  taper  was  ceremoniously  burned.  The  neophytes  underwent 
a  species  of  conversion  ;  Marsilio  Ficino  (1433-99)  was  said  to  have 
been  called  in  his  youth  to  be  a  physician  of  souls,  and  designated  as  the 
translator  of  the  two  great  masters,  Plato  and  Plotinus.  Man  was  con- 
ceived as  like  unto  God,  and  was  named  divine  ;  his  destiny  was  to  seek 
eternal  union  with  the  God  from  whom  he  came.  That  God  was  tlie 
archetype  of  the  universe,  its  unmoved  mover  and  orderer,  the  ground  of 
all  our  reasoning,  the  light  of  all  our  seeing.  He  knew  the  world  from 
within  when  He  knew  Himself,  for  creation  was  only  tlie  expression  of 
the  divine  thought,  God  as  it  were  speaking  with  Himself,  and  man 
overhearing  His  speech. 

The  circle  of  those  devoted  to  the  study  of  this  philosopliy  contained 
the  most  distinguished  scliolars  of  the  day.  Besides  Ficino  tliere  stood 
his  friends  or  converts,  Angelo  Poliziano,  though  his  fame  is  mainly 
philological ;  Cristoforo  Landino,  the  exponent  of  Horace,  of  Virgil, 


702  The  new  Aristotelians 

and  of  Dante,  who  lias  given  us  a  picture  of  Florentine  society  which 
recalls  Plato's  Symposium ;  Girolamo  Benivieni,  the  poet  who  sang  in 
praise  of  Platonic  love  ;  the  architect,  painter  and  man  of  letters, 
Leo  Battista  Alberti ;  Pico  della  Mirandola,  of  whose  faith  and  fame 
and  achievements  we  have  already  spoken;  and  above  all  the  men  of 
the  Medicean  House  who  founded  the  so-called  Platonic  Academy  of 
Florence.  This  was  rather  a  Society  than  a  School,  not  an  equipped  and 
organised  college,  but  an  association  of  like-minded  men  who  cultivated 
philosophy  and  professed  to  live  according  to  the  philosophy  they  cul- 
tivated. It  added  lustre  to  the  reign  of  the  INIedici,  helped  to  define  its 
character,  to  fix  upon  it  name  and  distinction.  Under  Cosmo  and  his 
son  Piero,  and  esx^eciall}^  under  his  grandson  Lorenzo,  it  became  the 
centre  and  sum  and  even  source  of  Florentine  culture.  But  the  patronage 
of  the  House  proved  fatal  to  the  thought  for  which  the  Academy  stood  ; 
with  the  House  it  rose,  lived  in  its  smile,  fell  in  its  fall.  Yet  it  did  not 
fall  before  it  had  accomplished  things  that  could  not  die.  It  revealed  the 
world  which  the  Church  had  extinguished  and  the  Schoolmen  superseded  ; 
it  raised  the  reason  that  could  speculate  concerning  truth  above  the 
authority  that  would  legislate  in  its  behalf  ;  it  taught  men  to  believe 
that  the  truth  lived  in  the  soul  rather  than  in  books,  that  nature  was 
beautiful  and  man  was  good,  and  that  truth  existed  before  Church  or 
Councils  and  stood  outside  them  both,  and  that  man  attains  to  the  larger 
humanity  by  the  study  of  that  literature  in  which  the  truth  adapted  to 
his  nature  is  best  expressed.  These  were  indeed  notable  contributions  to 
the  thought  of  the  century. 

But  though  Plato  lived  in  the  New  Academy,  Aristotle  still  reigned 
in  the  older  Schools.  He  had  been  too  efficient  an  instrument  in 
education  to  be  easily  pushed  aside;  but  the  thought  which  is  to  shape 
living  mind  must  not  itself  be  dead.  Hence  the  men,  who  were  by  birth 
as  well  as  by  discipline  Aristotelians,  set  themselves  to  rejuvenate  the 
ancient  Master  and  change  his  obsolete  speech  into  the  language  of  the 
day.  Three  tendencies  at  once  showed  themselves,  one  which  interpreted 
Aristotle  in  the  sense  and  manner  of  Averroes  ;  a  second  which  construed 
him  by  the  help  of  the  Greek  commentators,  especially  Alexander  of 
Aphrodisia  ;  and  a  third  which  laboured  to  reconcile  him  with  Plato, 
some  of  the  last-named  going  to  Aristotle  for  their  physics,  but  to  Plato 
for  their  metaphysics.  It  soon  became  evident  that  the  philosophical 
questions  involved  theology  and  raised  issues  affecting  certain  dogmas  of 
the  Church.  These  issues  were  more  sharply  defined  in  the  Aristotelian 
than  in  the  Neo-Platonic  Schools  and  seriously  alarmed  the  Church. 
How  this  was  and  with  what  reason,  Pomponazzi  (1462-1524:)  —  Peretto, 
or  little  Peter,  as  he  was  affectionately  named  —  will  help  us  to  understand. 

Reverence  for  Aristotle  had  become  in  him  a  second  nature  ;  and 
though  he  writes  poor  Latin  and  knows  no  Greek,  and  is,  as  he  said,  in 


Poinponazzi  703 


comparison  with  his  master  but  an  insect  beside  an  elephant,  yet  lie 
desires  to  serve  truth  by  interpreting  his  philosophy,  lie  frankly  em- 
phasised its  opposition  to  faith  ;  and  narrowly  escaped  being  burned 
for  his  pains,  though  his  books  were  not  so  fortunate.  He  said  :  "  The 
thinker,  who  inquires  into  the  divine  mysteries,  is  like  Proteus.  In 
face  of  consequences  he  neither  hungers  nor  thirsts,  eats  or  sleeps  ;  the 
Inquisition  persecutes  him  as  a  heretic  ;  the  multitude  mocks  him  as  a 
fool."  Doubt  is  native  to  him,  and  like  Descartes  he  doubts  that  he  may 
know ;  but,  unlike  Descartes,  his  doubt  is  more  critical  than  specula- 
tive, more  literary  than  philosophical.  And  if  he  has  a  doubt  to  express 
he  dearly  loves  to  express  it  in  another  name  than  his  own,  or  shield 
himself  behind  some  noted  autliority.  Religions  he  conceives  as  laws  in- 
stituted by  lawgivers,  like  Christ  or  IMohammed,  for  the  regulation  of 
life.  They  are  governed  in  their  coming  and  going,  in  their  bloom  and 
deca}^,  b}^  time  and  space  ,•  and  their  horoscope  can  be  cast  just  as  if  they 
were  mortal  beings.  Christianity  is  proved  true  by  its  miracles,  which 
are  not  impossible,  though  they  have  now  ceased  to  happen  and  fictitious 
marvels  have  taken  their  place.  Since  religions  are  laws,  they  must 
promise  to  reward  the  righteous  and  threaten  to  punish  the  wicked  ; 
and  as  conduct  rather  than  knowledge  is  their  end  they  may  use  parables 
and  myths,  which,  of  course,  need  not  be  true.  Man  is  like  the  ass  which 
must  be  beaten  that  it  may  carry  its  burden  ;  to  teach  him  deep  mysteries 
would  be  but  to  waste  our  breath.  Nor  are  we  to  esteem  him  too  highly 
or  exhort  him  to  become  godlike,  for  how  can  man  resemble  a  God  whom 
he  cannot  know  ?  As  it  is  impossible  to  have  natural  grounds  for  a 
supernatural  faith  we  must  be  content  to  hold  it  without  reason,  though 
it  may  be  a  gift  of  grace.  If  religion  be  moral  then  man  must  be  free. 
And  though  his  freedom  may  be  incapable  of  rational  proof  yet  it  is  a 
matter  of  conscious  experience.  This,  indeed,  may  seem  incompatible 
with  Providence,  which  Aristotle  conceived  as  general  rather  than  par- 
ticular, though  we  conceive  it  as  a  general  made  up  of  all  particulars  ; 
but  where  philosophy  is  blind  revelation  may  see,  and  it  is  better  to  trust 
it  than  to  walk  in  darkness.  The  God  who  governs  has  created,  and 
creation  was  willed  in  eternity,  but  happens  in  time,  for  Aristotle's  idea 
of  an  eternal  creation  is  sophistical.  As  the  workman  loves  his  handi- 
work so  God  loves  all  His  creatures  and  wills  their  good.  He  has  given 
to  every  being,  not  perhaps  the  absolutely  best,  but  the  best  for  it  and 
for  the  universe,  viewed  in  their  complementary  and  reciprocal  relations. 
For  men  supplement  each  other  ;  what  seems  in  and  by  itself  a  defect 
may  become  an  excellency  when  seen  from  the  standpoint  of  the  collec- 
tive whole.  Man  lives  in  humanity,  humanity  within  nature,  nature 
in  God  ;  and  we  ought  to  know  all  together  before  we  judge  any 
separately. 

This   is  what  would   be    called    to-day  a   system  of   philosophical 
agnosticism,  where  man's  ignorance  becomes  a  plea,  if  not  a  reason  for 


704  The  new  scholasticism 

faith  ;  but  what  it  signified  to  Pomponazzi  we  shall  best  understand  by- 
turning  to  his  famous  treatise  on  the  Immortality  of  the  Soul.  The 
treatise  is  at  once  an  attempt  at  the  historical  interpretation  of  Aristotle 
and  a  serious  independent  discussion.  It  is  practically  concerned  with 
the  question  :  How  did  Aristotle  conceive  immortality,  as  personal  or  as 
collective  ?  It  is  as  little  soluble  by  the  natural  reason  as  the  cognate 
question  whether  the  world  is  eternal  or  created  ;  in  each  case  the 
problem  as  to  the  beginning  holds  the  key  of  the  problem  as  to  the  end. 
The  Aristotelian  Schoolmen  had  argued  that  the  capacity  of  the  soul  to 
think  the  eternal  and  will  the  universal  implied  its  immortality.  But 
what  is  the  soul  ?  We  cannot  define  it  as  thought  percipient  of  the 
universal  reason,  for  there  can  be  no  thought  without  ideas  and  no 
ideas  without  sense.  The  soul  which  lives  within  nature  must  develop 
according  to  natural  law  and  in  obedience  to  it.  Now,  we  never  find 
soul  without  body ;  and  hence  we  must  ask  :  how  are  these  related  ?  Not 
as  mover  and  moved,  else  their  proper  analogies  would  be  the  ox  and  the 
waggon  it  draws,  but  as  matter  and  form,  i.e.  without  the  body  the  soul 
could  not  be,  for  only  through  the  body  does  man  take  his  place  in 
nature  and  realise  his  rational  activity.  Hence  the  human  soul  cannot 
exist  without  the  human  body,  and  must  therefore  be  liable  to  the  same 
mortality.  And  this  conclusion  is  worked  out  in  connexion  with  the 
moral  doctrine  that  man  is  bound  to  act  from  love  of  virtue  and  horror 
of  vice,  and  not  from  any  hope  of  reward  or  fear  of  punishment,  and  so 
to  act  as  to  make  all  nature  the  better  for  his  action.  Reason,  then, 
must  conclude  that  the  soul  is  mortal ;  but  religion  comes  to  our  aid, 
and  by  teaching  us  to  believe  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body  resolves 
our  doubts.  Of  this  doctrine  philosophy  knows  nothing,  and  so  we  can 
hold  it  only  as  an  article  of  faith.  This  is  in  effect  all  Pomponazzi  can 
teach  us  ;  religion  and  reason  occupy  opposite  camps  ;  neither  can  hold 
intercourse  with  the  other.  The  truths  of  religion  are  the  contradic- 
tions of  the  reason  ;  the  processes  of  the  reason  cannot  serve  the  cause 
of  religion.  The  new  scholasticism  was  a  philosophy  of  reasoned 
ignorance  where  the  cardinal  verities  of  religion  were  the  incon- 
ceivabilities of  thought. 

But  here  certain  new  forces  which  seriously  affected  the  course  and 
the  development  of  Latin  thought  must  be  referred  to  and  analysed. 
The  ecclesiastical  situation  began  to  change,  and  the  temper  of  the 
Renaissance  changed  with  it.  Thought  had  revived  without  conscious 
antagonism  to  the  Church,  though  with  the  clear  sense  of  opposition  to 
the  Schools  and  their  methods.  Churchmen  had  been  forward  in  culti- 
vating the  new  spirit,  had  encouraged  and  studied  its  literature,  appre- 
ciated and  promoted  its  art.  But  the  Reformation,  with  its  attendant 
incidents,  made  the  Church  suspicious  of  movements  which  might 
contain  the  seeds  of  revolt,  while  the  Renaissance,  always  sensitive  to 


New  attitude  of  the  defenders  of  the  Church        705 

outer  conditions,  lost  its  spontaneity,  becoming  self-conscious  and  critical. 
Italy  after  1525  became  what  the  Moorish  wars  had  made  Spain,  sullen 
in  temper  and  jealous  in  disposition  ;  she  imitated  Spanish  methods  and 
developed  the  Inquisition ;  in  Rome,  once  careless  and  happy,  the  Holy 
Office  was  founded. 

One  of  the  earliest  fruits  of  this  change  of  feeling  was  the  revival  of 
Scholasticism  and  the  increased  influence  of  the  Spanish  mind  upon  the 
Italian.  This  revived  Scholasticism,  which  was  bred  mainly  in  two 
Orders,  both  of  Spanish  origin,  the  Dominican  and  the  Jesuit,  and 
introduced  by  them  into  schools  and  universities,  pulpits  and  Courts, 
learning  and  literature,  was  used  to  prove  the  necessity  of  the  Church  to 
religion,  of  the  Pope  to  the  Church,  and  of  all  three  to  society  and  the 
State.  It  had  the  learning  which  the  Renaissance  created,  but  was 
without  its  knowledge  of  antiquity,  its  sympathy  with  it,  or  its  belief  in 
finding  there  virtue  and  truth.  Its  purpose  was  indeed  quite  specific  : 
to  prove  not  that  the  Church  was  the  mother  of  culture  or  mistress  of 
art,  but  that  she  was  the  sole  possessor  of  truth,  the  one  authority  by 
which  it  could  be  defined,  authenticated,  and  guaranteed.  The  line  of 
defence  was  bold :  the  Church  was  the  creation  of  God,  its  government 
His  express  design,  its  rulers  instituted  by  His  immediate  act.  Secular 
rulers  were  but  mediate  creatures  of  God,  appointed  through  the  people 
and  responsible  to  them;  but  spiritual  rulers  were  His  immediate 
creation  and  responsible  to  Him  alone.  And  since  the  Church  was  the 
sole  custodian  of  truth,  it  was  not  permissible  to  seek  it  without  her 
or  outside  her ;  to  profess  to  have  found  it  independently  was  to  be 
heretical ;  to  obey  what  had  been  so  found  was  to  fall  into  the  deadliest 
schism.  The  argument  may  have  been  narrow,  but  it  was  clear  and 
strenuous ;  it  may  not  have  converted  opponents,  but  it  convinced 
friends.  The  Church  became  conscious  of  her  mission ;  she  was  the 
guardian  of  thought,  the  guide  of  mind.  She  alone  could  judge  what 
was  truth  and  what  error,  what  men  ought  to  do  or  ought  not  to  know. 
And  as  she  believed  so  she  acted,  with  results  that  are  broadly  written 
upon  the  face  of  history.  The  new  Scholastics  converted  their  own 
Church  from  the  Catholicity  which  encouraged  the  Renaissance  to  the 
Romanism  which  suppressed  its  thought. 

This,  then,  is  what  we  have  now  to  see ;  and  so  we  resume  our  dis- 
cussion of  the  thought  which,  as  it  faced  the  second  quarter  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  began  to  feel  the  creeping  shadow  of  the  future.  The  change 
came  slowly  —  for  mind  loves  a  violent  catastrophe  as  little  as  nature 
—  still  it  came  and  was  marked  by  the  rise  of  physical  in  succession  to 
metaphysical  speculation.  The  Neo-Platonic  school  had  tended  to  a 
mystical  and  allegorical  conception  of  the  world,  which  implied  a  doctrine 
of  the  divine  immanence  and  looked  towards  Pantheism.  The  Aristo- 
telians, on  the  other  hand,  emphasised  the  ideas  of  cause  and  Creator, 

C.    M.   H.    II.  ^^ 


706  Bernardino  Telesio 

conceived  the  universe  as  manufactured  and  limited,  and  God  as  tran- 
scendent, the  two  being  correlated  in  the  manner  of  the  later  deism. 
The  one  school  was  inclined  to  read  nature  through  Deity,  the  other 
Deity  through  nature  ;  but  in  each  case  nature  took  its  meaning  from  the 
temper  and  fundamental  postulates  of  the  school.  The  traditional  ideas 
were  Aristotelian  ;  the  universe  was  geocentric ;  its  main  fact  was  the 
oj)position  of  heaven  and  earth,  with  the  involved  antithesis  of  the 
higher  or  celestial  element,  and  the  four  lower  elements,  earth,  air,  fire, 
water,  all  movement  being  explained  from  their  attempts  to  effect  a 
change  of  place. 

This  theory  could  not  satisfy  men  who  believed  in  a  philosopliy  of 
immanence  ;  and  efforts  were  soon  made  to  dislodge  it.  One  of  the 
earliest  and  most  notable  of  these  stands  associated  with  the  name  of 
Bernardino  Telesio  (1508-80).  He  was  a  devout  son  of  the  Church  as 
well  as  a  zealous  student  of  nature,  and  he  disliked  Aristotle  for  two 
reasons  :  first,  because  his  philosophy  knows  neither  piety  nor  a  Creator  ; 
and,  secondly,  because  he  tried  to  interpret  nature  without  questioning 
herself.  Telesio's  fundamental  principle  was  this :  nature  must  be 
explained  in  her  own  terms  according  to  the  method  of  experience  and 
by  the  instrument  of  the  senses.  He  conceived  matter  as  a  substance 
incapable  of  increase  or  decrease,  more  or  less  passive,  yet  susceptible 
of  being  acted  upon  by  two  forces,  heat  and  cold,  which,  as  causes, 
respectively,  of  expansion  and  contraction,  produce  all  motion  and  all 
change.  The  heavens  are  the  home  of  heat,  and  the  earth  of  cold ;  and 
the  constant  effort  of  heat  to  illumine  the  dark  and  quicken  the  cold 
issue  in  a  conflict  whence  come  all  the  movement  and  variety  of  nature. 
The  whole  proceeds  according  to  immanent  laws  and  without  the  inter- 
vention of  God.  Nature  is  self-contained  and  self-sufficient ;  which 
however  did  not  mean  that  she  is  without  intelligence  ;  on  the  contrary, 
there  is  a  soul  in  things ;  each  supplements  and  serves  the  other ; 
mind  lives  in  each,  and  works  through  the  whole.  Bacon  saw  in  Telesio 
a  return  to  Parmenides  ;  others  have  seen  in  him  an  anticipation  of 
Kant;  others  again  have  construed  his  principle  "won  ratiorie  sed  sensu'" 
as  if  he  were  the  first  of  modern  empiricists,  the  forerunner  of  the  sensuous 
philosophy,  both  English  and  French.  In  all  these  views  there  is  a 
measure  of  truth.  He  clothed  his  doctrines  in  a  guise  more  or  less 
mythical ;  he  could  best  conceive  natural  forces  as  personal,  and  he  was 
never  so  ideal  as  when  he  meant  to  be  most  realistic.  But  he  intended  to 
be  true  to  his  principle,  to  construe  nature  not  through  metaphysics  or 
theology,  but  from  herself  alone.  It  is  this  that  makes  him  so  significant 
in  the  history  of  thought,  anticipating  so  much  of  what  Bacon  achieved, 
and  places  him,  in  spite  of  his  crude  and  allegorical  nomenclature,  amid 
the  forefathers  of  modern  physics. 

The  speculations  of  Telesio  did  not  stand  alone  ;  they  were  character- 
istic of  his  race  and  time.     Italy,  during  what  remained  of  the  century, 


CampaneUa. —  Giordano  Bruno  707 

seemed  to  forsake  philosophy  for  science,  but  the  science  she  cultivated 
was  only  disguised  philosophy.  A  distinguislied  contemporary,  a  critic 
and  a  Platonist,  was  Francesco  Patrizzi  (1529-97),  who  agreed  with  the 
Telesian  physics,  but  differed  in  his  metaphysics  :  arguing  that,  as  both 
the  corporeal  and  spiritual  light  emanated  from  one  source,  each  was  the 
kin  and  correlate  of  the  other,  the  effects  being  reduced  to  unity  by  the 
unity  of  the  cause.  Another  and  younger  contemporary,  who  loved  to 
think  and  speak  of  himself  as  Telesio's  disciple,  though  he  only  saw  tlie 
master  after  death,  was  Tommaso  Campanella  (1568-1639).  His  career 
has  something  of  the  tragedy  which  belongs  to  another  and  even  more 
distinguished  contemporary,  Galileo  Galilei  (1564-1642),  for  whom  he 
wrote  while  suffering  imprisonmenta  noble  thoughunsuccessful  Apology. 
Like  Galilei,  Campanella  lived  after  Copernicus,  and  was  attracted  by 
his  sublimer  and  vaster  view  of  the  universe;  and,  like  Copernicus,  he 
was  accused  of  heresy  in  consequence,  spending,  partly  on  account  of  his 
religious  and  partly  on  account  of  his  political  views,  twenty-seven  years 
of  his  life  in  prison.  He  was  at  first,  and  lie  probably  remained,  in 
spite  of  all  the  persecutions  he  endured,  a  faithful  Catholic.  While  he 
followed  Telesio,  he  was  yet  a  most  independent  disciple.  His  science 
evolved  into  a  philosopliy  of  existence,  whose  highest  truth  is  the  Deity, 
and  whose  fixed  first  principle  is  the  thought,  the  "  iVoil/o  ahdita  innata,'" 
which  is  man.  He  was  praised  by  Leibniz  as  one  who  soared  to 
heaven,  in  contrast  to  Hobbes,  who  grovelled  upon  the  earth.  Then  as 
Telesio  anticipated  Bacon,  Campanella  anticipated  Descartes.  Though 
he  does  not  use  the  formula  he  holds  the  principle  of  the  "  cogito  ergo 
sum.''^  Both  are  rooted  in  Augustine,  who  said  :  "As  for  me,  tlie  most 
certain  of  all  things  is  that  I  exist.  Even  if  thou  deniest  this  and 
sayest  that  I  deceive  myself,  yet  thou  dost  confess  that  I  am,  for  if  I  do 
not  live  how  could  I  deceive  myself?"  One  of  the  strangest  things  in 
connexion  with  the  Catholic  Campanella  is  the  State,  as  desci-ibed  by  hi7n 
in  his  Civitas  Solis.  It  is  an  echo  of  the  Platonic  Republic,  without 
private  property  or  family,  with  sexual  intercourse  pul)li(;ly  reguhated 
and  children  owned  and  educated  by  the  State,  without  a  priesthood 
or  public  and  positive  religion,  with  philosophers  as  rulers  and  work- 
men as  the  true  nobility.  It  was  a  noble  dream,  and  shows  liow  little 
physical  speculation  had  killed  ethical  passion  ;  the  best  interpreted 
earth  was  empty  till  it  was  made  the  home  of  happy  and  contented  men. 
Giordano  Bruno  (1548-1600)  is  of  all  the  thinkers  of  the  Latin 
Renaissance  the  most  modern  ;  in  him  science  becomes  philosophical, 
and  philosophy  speaks  the  language  of  science,  confronts,  defines,  and 
enlarges  its  problems.  Asa  man  he  is  passionate,  explosive,  impetuous, 
vain,  intolerant,  and  indomitable  ;  and  where  these  qualities  are  allowed 
freely  to  mix  and  express  themselves  it  is  very  difficult  indeed  to  bo 
just.  He  himself  says  that  "  if  the  first  button  of  one's  coat  is  wrongly 
buttoned  all  the  rest  will  be  crooked  "  ;  and  the  event  which  set  his 


708  Giordano  Bruno 


whole  life  awry  happened  when,  as  a  lad  of  sixteen,  he  entered  the 
Dominican  Order.  He  early  thought  himself  into  heresy,  and  in  his 
nature  were  fires  which  "all  the  snows  of  Caucasus"  could  not  quench. 
In  the  effort  to  unfrock  himself  he  became  a  wanderer,  tried  Rome, 
roamed  over  Northern  Italy,  crossed  the  Alps,  and  settled  at  Geneva, 
where  he  found  neither  the  discipline  nor  the  doctrine  of  the  Reformec  I 
Church  to  his  mind.  He  then  emigrated  to  Toulouse,  where  he  studied 
the  New  Astronomy,  tried  to  be  at  home  and  to  teach  the  fanatical 
Catholics  of  southern  France  in  a  city  where  the  Inquisition  had  an 
ancient  history.  He  next  moved  to  Paris,  where  he  attempted  to 
instruct  the  doctors  of  the  Sorbonne  and  to  make  his  peace  with  the 
Church  ;  and,  failing,  he  crossed  to  England,  where  he  lived  for  awhile, 
wrote  and  published  in  London,  and  at  Oxford  claimed  with  much 
literary  extravagance  the  right  to  lecture.  To  his  Italian  soul  England 
was  an  uncongenial  clime ;  he  praised  Elizabeth,  as  the  Inquisition 
remembered  later  to  his  hurt  ;  but  he  despised  the  barbarians  over  whom 
she  ruled,  and  the  ostentatious  wealth  and  intellectual  impotence  of 
Oxford  in  her  day. 

From  England  he  wandered  back  to  France  and  thence  to  Germany, 
where  he  lectured  at  Wittenberg  and  eulogised  Luther,  who  had  "  like  a 
modern  Hercules  fought  with  Cerberus  and  his  triple  crown."  He  was 
elected  to  a  professorship  at  Helmstedt  ;  which  he  soon  forsook  for 
Frankfort.  But  the  home-sickness  which  would  not  be  denied  was  on 
him,  and  he  turned  back  to  Italy  where  bloomed  the  culture  which  was 
to  him  the  finest  flower  of  humanity,  where  dwelt  the  men  who  moved 
him  to  love  and  not  to  hate,  whose  speech  and  thought  threw  over  him 
a  spell  he  could  not  resist.  He  was  denounced  to  the  Inquisition ; 
spent  eight  years  in  prison,  first  in  Venice  and  then  in  Rome ;  and, 
finally,  on  February  17,  1600,  he  was  sent  to  the  stake.  Caspar  Scioppius, 
a  German  who  had  passed  from  the  Protestant  to  the  Roman  Church, 
and  who  loved  neither  Bruno  nor  his  views,  tells  us  that  when  the 
prisoner  heard  his  sentence  he  only  said,  "  You  who  condemn  me  perhaps 
hear  the  judgment  with  greater  fear  than  myself."  And  he  adds  that 
at  the  stake  Bruno  put  aside  a  crucifix  which  was  held  out  to  him,  and 
so  entered  heaven  proclaiming  how  the  Romans  dealt  with  "blasphemous 
and  godless  men."  A  modern  admirer  sees,  in  the  eyes  uplifted  to  the 
blue,  a  spirit  that  would  have  no  dark  image  stand  between  him  and 
the  living  God. 

It  is  customary  now  to  describe  Bruno's  system  as  aform  of  pantheism. 
The  term  was  not  known  then,  or  indeed  for  more  than  a  hundred  years 
after  his  death,  which  means  that  the  idea  is  as  modern  as  the  term. 
Bruno  was  roundly  named,  just  as  Spinoza  was  later,  an  atheist,  for  men 
thought  it  was  all  one  to  identify  God  with  nature  and  to  deny  His 
independent  existence.  The  systems  were  indeed  radically  unlike  ;  for 
while  the  one  was  a  theophantism  or  apotheosis  of  nature,  the  other  was 


His  philosophy  709 


an  akosmism  or  a  naturalisation  of  God  :  in  other  words,  Bruno  started 
with  nature  and  ended  with  Deity,  but  Spinoza  began  with  Deity,  his 
causa  sui,  substantia,  or  ens  absolute  infinitum,  and  reasoned  down  to 
nature.  The  antecedents  of  the  one  system  were  classical  and  philo- 
sophical but  those  of  the  other  Semitic  and  religious.  The  historical 
factors  of  Bruno's  thought  were  two,  ancient  or  Neo-Platonic,  and  modern 
or  scientific.  His  system,  if  system  it  can  be  called,  may  be  described  as 
an  attempt  to  state  and  to  articulate  the  ideas  inherited  by  him  in  the 
terms  of  the  universe  which  Copernicus  had  revealed. 

He  conceived  this  universe  as  infinite,  and  so  rejected  the  ancient 
scholastic  idea  of  a  limited  nature  with  its  distinctions  and  divisions  of 
place,  its  here  and  there,  its  above  and  below,  its  cycles  and  epicycles. 
But  the  universe,  wliich  has  no  centre  and  therefore  no  circumference,  has 
yet  a  unity  for  consciousness,  and  wherever  consciousness  is  its  unity 
appears.  And  this  unity  signifies  that  order  reigns  in  the  universe  ;  that 
its  phenomena  are  connected ;  thatindividualthingsare  yet  not  insulated  ; 
and  this  coherence  implies  that  all  are  animated  by  a  common  life  and 
moved  by  a  common  cause.  And  this  cause  must  be  as  infinite  as  the 
universe  ;  for  an  infinite  effect  can  proceed  only  from  an  infinite  cause, 
and  such  a  cause  can  be  worthily  expressed  only  in  such  an  effect.  But 
there  is  no  room  for  two  infinities  to  exist  at  the  same  moment  in  the 
same  place  ;  and  so  the  effect  must  be  simply  the  body  of  the  cause,  the 
cause  the  soul  of  the  effect.  Hence  the  cause  is  immanent,  not  tran- 
scendent ;  matter  is  animated,  the  pregnant  mother  who  bears  and  brings 
forth  all  forms  and  varieties  of  being.  And  the  soul  which  animates 
matter  and  energises  the  whole  is  God  ;  He  is  the  natura  naturans.  Who 
is  not  above  and  not  outside,  but  within  and  through,  all  things.  He  is 
the  monad  of  monads,  the  spirit  of  spirits,  carried  so  within  that  we 
cannot  think  ourselves  without  thinking  Him. 

There  are,  indeed,  other  expressions  in  Bruno  ;  God  is  described  as 
"  the  supersubstantial  substance,"  as  "  the  supernatural  first  principle," 
exalted  far  above  nature,  which  is  only  a  shadow  of  divine  truth,  speaking 
to  us  in  parables.  And  this  is  possible,  because  in  every  single  thing  the 
whole  is  manifested,  just  as  one  picture  reveals  the  artist's  power  and 
promise.  But  these  things  signify  that  he  refused  to  conceive  God  as  a 
mere  physical  force  or  material  energy,  and  held,  on  the  contrary,  that 
He  must  be  interpreted  in  the  terms  of  mind  or  spirit.  He  hates,  indeed, 
the  notion  that  nature  is  an  accident,  or  the  result  of  voluntary  action  ; 
and  he  labours  to  represent  it  as  a  necessity,  seeking  by  a  theory  of 
emanation  or  instinctive  action  to  reconcile  the  notions  of  necessity  and 
God.  Yet  he  does  not  conceive  the  best  as  already  attained.  Every- 
thing in  nature  strives  to  become  better  ;  everywhere  instinct  feels  after 
the  good,  though  higlier  than  instinct  is  that  which  it  seeks  to  become, 
the  rational  action  that  wills  the  best.  Thought  rises,  like  sense  and 
instinct,  from  lower  to  higher  forms.     Heroic  love,  which  desires  the 


710  The  French  Renaissance 

intuition  of  the  truth,  drives  us  ever  upwards,  that  we  may  attain  the 
perfect  rest  where  understanding  and  will  are  unified. 

Bruno's  speculations  were  those  of  a  poet  as  well  as  a  philosopher  ; 
and  were  in  various  ways  prophetic.  His  death  by  fire  at  Rome  signified 
that  Italy  had  neither  the  wit  nor  the  will  to  understand  men  of  his 
kind  ;  that  for  her  the  Renaissance  had  run  its  course,  so  that  men  must 
pursue  its  problems  elsewhere  in  the  hope  of  a  more  satisfactory  solution. 
Descartes'  "  de  omnibus  dubitandum  est "  was  but  the  negative  expression 
of  Bruno's  positive  effort  after  emancipation  from  authority,  the  freedom 
without  which  thought  can  accomplish  nothing.  Spinoza's  substantia,  with 
its  twin  attributes  of  thought  and  extension  on  the  one  hand,  and  Leibniz' 
monadology  on  the  other,  carried  into  more  perfect  forms  the  quest  on 
which  he  had  embarked.  But  to  us  he  has  an  even  higher  significance  ; 
he  is  the  leader  of  the  noble  army  of  thinkers  who  have  tried  at  once  to 
justify  and  to  develop  into  a  completer  system  of  the  universe  the  dreams 
and  the  doctrines  of  modern  science.  It  is  this  which  makes  him  the  fit 
close  of  the  movement,  which  began  by  waking  the  old  world  from  its 
grave  and  ended  by  saluting  the  birth  of  the  thought  that  made  the 
whole  world  new. 

We  have  not  as  yet  approached  the  French  Renaissance,  which 
has  indeed  an  interest  and  character  of  its  own.  It  was,  while  less 
philosophical,  more  strictly  educational,  literary,  and  juristic  than  the 
Italian  ;  and  may  be  described  as  both  Teutonic  and  Latin  in  origin. 
It  entered  the  north  and  penetrated  as  far  as  Paris  with  the  Adagia  of 
Erasmus,  published  in  1500  ;  but  it  reached  the  south  from  Italy, 
crossing  the  Alps  with  the  gentlemen  of  France  who  accompanied  their 
Kings  on  those  incursions  which  had,  as  Montaigne  tells  us,  so  fateful 
an  influence  on  the  French  morals  and  mind.  Correspondent  to  this 
difference  in  origin  was  a  difference  in  spirit  and  in  the  field  of  activit}'. 
In  the  north  the  Renaissance  made  its  home  in  the  schools,  and  worked 
for  the  improvement  of  the  education,  the  amelioration  of  the  laws,  and 
the  reform  of  religion,  as  names  like  Bude,  Pierre  de  la  Ramee,  and 
Beza,  may  help  us  to  realise  ;  but  in  the  south  it  was  more  personal 
and  less  localised,  its  learning  was  nearer  akin  to  culture  than  to  educa- 
tion, and  it  loved  literature  more  than  philosophy.  Hence  the  forms  it 
assumed  in  France  can  hardly  be  said  to  call  for  separate  discussion  here. 
Especially  is  this  true  of  its  more  northern  form  ;  a  better  case  might  be 
made  out  for  the  southern.  To  it  belong  the  great  names  of  Rabelais 
and  Montaigne  ;  but  their  place  is  in  a  history  of  literature  rather  than 
of  thought,  though  both  affected  the  course  of  the  latter  too  profoundly 
to  be  left  unmentioned  here. 

Coleridge  has  said  that  Rabelais  was  "  among  the  deepest  as  well  as 
boldest  thinkers  of  his  age  "  ;  that  the  rough  stick  he  used  yet  "  con- 
tained a  rod  of  gold  "  ;  and  that  a  treatise  could  be  written  "  in  praise  of 


Rabelais  and  Montaigne  711 

the  moral  elevation  of  his  work  which  would  make  the  Church  stare  and 
the  conventicle  groan,  and  yet  would  be  the  truth,  and  nothing  but  the 
truth."  These  may  seem  liard  sayings,  utterly  incredible  if  portions  of 
his  work  are  alone  regarded,  but  accurate  enough  if  the  purpose  and 
drift  of  his  teaching  as  a  whole  be  considered.  It  has  been  well  said 
that  the  confession  of  faith  of  the  cure  of  Meudon  has  far  more  moral 
reality  than  that  which  Rousseau  puts  into  the  mouth  of  his  Savoyard 
vicar.  He  believes  that  the  universe  needs  no  other  governor  than  its 
Creator,  whose  word  guides  the  whole  and  determines  the  nature,  pro- 
perties, and  condition  of  each  several  thing.  Pascal's  famous  definition 
of  Deity,  "  a  circle  whose  centre  is  everywhere  and  whose  circumference 
is  nowhere,"  is  but  an  echo  from  Rabelais.  And  he  can,  with  the  wisest 
of  the  ancients  and  the  best  of  the  moderns,  speak  of  the  "  great  Soul 
of  the  universe  which  quickens  all  things."  La  Bruyere  described  his 
work  as  "  a  chimera ;  it  has  the  face  of  a  beautiful  woman,  but  the  tail 
of  a  serpent."  Yet  surely  the  man  who  had  to  wear  the  mask  of  a 
buffoon  that  he  might  preach  the  wisdom  of  truth  and  love  to  his  age, 
well  deserves  the  epigram  which  Beza  wrote  in  his  honour  : 

"  Qui  sic  nugatur,  tractantem  ut  seria  vincat, 
Seria  cum  faciei  die,  rogo,  quantus  erit  ?  " 

Montaigne  is  of  all  Frenchmen  most  thoroughly  a  son  of  the 
Renaissance.  He  loves  books,  especially  the  solid  and  sensible  and 
well-flavoured  books  written  in  the  ancient  classic  tongues,  the  men  who 
made  and  those  who  read  them,  and  he  loved  to  study  man.  He  says  : 
"  Je  suis  may  mesme  la  matiere  de  mon  livre.''  And  he  does  not  under- 
stand himself  in  any  little  or  narrow  sense,  but  rather  as  the  epitome 
and  mirror  of  mankind.  The  world  in  which  he  lived  was  not  friendly 
to  the  freedom  of  thought  which  was  expressed  in  affirmative  speech  or 
creative  conduct,  and  so  he  learned  to  be  silent  —  or  sceptical.  He  had 
seen  men  hate  each  other,  willingly  burn  or  be  burned,  out  of  love  to 
God  ;  and  he  was  moved  by  pity  to  moralise  on  the  behaviour  of  those 
who  were  so  positive  where  they  could  not  know,  and  so  little  under- 
stood the  God  in  whom  they  professed  to  believe  that  they  never  saw 
what  the  love  of  Him  bound  them  to  be  and  to  do.  The  man  that  he 
studied  and  described  was  not  abstract  but  concrete  man,  with  all  his 
foibles  and  failings,  limited  in  his  nature  but  infinite  in  liis  views, 
differing  without  ceasing  from  his  fellows,  and  not  always  able  to  agree 
with  himself.  And  man,  so  conceived,  dwells  amid  mystery,  has  it 
within  him,  and  confronts  it  without.  Custom  may  guide  him,  but 
not  reason  ;  for  reason  builds  on  arguments,  whose  evciy  position 
depends  on  another,  in  a  series  infinitely  regressive.  "X<'8  hommes 
8ont  tourment^s  par  leg  opinions  quails  ont  des  choses,  nan  par  les  chases 
mesmesr  Where  man  is  so  ignorant  he  ought  not  to  be  dogmatic  ; 
where  truth  is  what  all  seek  and  no  one  can  be  sure  that  he  finds, 


712  The  Teutonic  Renaissance 

i.e.  where  it  is  nothing  but  a  mere  probability,  it  is  a  folly  to  spill 
human  blood  for  it. 

God  is  unknown  even  in  religion ;  as  many  as  the  nations  of  men 
so  many  are  the  forms  under  which  He  is  worshipped.  And  when  they 
try  to  conceive  and  name  Him,  they  degrade  Him  to  their  own  level. 
God  is  made  in  the  image  of  man  rather  than  man  in  the  image  of 
God ;  to  the  Ethiopian  He  is  black,  to  the  Greek  He  is  white,  and  lithe 
and  graceful  ;  to  the  brute  He  would  be  bestial  and  to  the  triangle 
triangular.  Man,  then,  is  so  surrounded  with  contradictions  that  he 
cannot  say  what  is  or  is  not  true.  Wisdom  was  with  Sextus  Empi- 
ricus  when  he  said  :  "Trai^rl  Xo'ycp  Xoyo^  lao^  avrtKelrai.  II  ny  a  nulle 
raison  qui  rCen  ait  une  contraire,  dit  le  plus  sage  parti  des  philosojyhes.^' 
Where  man  so  doubts  he  is  too  paralysed  to  fight  or  to  affirm. 
Montaigne's  sympathies  might  be  with  those  who  worked  and  suffered 
for  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth  ;  but  his  egoism  inclined  to  the 
conventional  and  followed  the  consuetudinary.  Prevost-Paradol  termed 
him  "  une perpetuelle  legon  de  temperance  et  de  moderation.''^  But  this  is  a 
lesson  which  men  of  culture  may  read  contentedly  ;  while  those  who 
struggle  to  live  or  to  make  life  worth  living  will  hardly  find  in  it  the 
Gospel  they  need. 

We  turn  now  to  the  Teutonic  Renaissance.  Like  the  Latin,  it  began 
as  a  revolt  against  the  sovereignty  of  Aristotle  ;  but,  unlike  the  Latin, 
its  literary  antecedents  were  patristic  and  Biblical  rather  than  classical. 
They  were,  indeed,  so  far  as  patristic,  specifically  Augustinian,  and,  so 
far  as  Biblical,  Pauline.  With  Augustine,  the  underlying  philosophy 
was  Neo-Platonic,  with  a  tendency  to  theosophy  and  mysticism ;  with 
Paul,  the  theology  involved  a  philosophy  of  human  nature  and  human 
history.  This  does  not  mean  that  other  Fathers  or  other  Scriptures 
were  ignored,  but  rather  that  Paul  was  interpreted  through  Augustine, 
and  Christ  through  Paul.  This  fundamental  difference  involved  two 
others.  In  the  first  place,  a  more  religious  and  more  democratic  temper ; 
the  religious  being  seen  in  the  attempt  to  realise  tlie  new  ideals,  and  the 
democratic  in  the  strenuous  and  combatant  spirit  by  which  alone  this 
could  be  accomplished.  The  thought  which  lived  in  the  Schools  could 
not  resist  the  authority  that  spoke  in  the  name  of  the  Church  and  was 
enforced  by  the  penalties  of  the  State  ;  but  the  thought  which  interpreted 
God  to  the  conscience  was  one  that  bowed  to  no  authority  lower  than 
His.  In  the  second  place,  Teutonic  was  more  theological  than  Latin 
thought.  The  categories,  which  the  past  had  formulated  for  the  inter- 
pretation of  being,  it  declined  to  accept  ;  and  so  it  had  to  discover  and 
define  those  which  it  meant  to  use  in  their  stead.  The  God  with  whom 
it  started  was  not  an  abstract  and  isolated  but  a  living  and  related  Deity  ; 
and  man  it  conceived  sub  specie  aeterjiitatis,  as  a  being  whom  God  had 
made  and  ruled.     The  very  limitation  of  its  field  was  an  enlargement  of 


Characteristics  of  the  movement  713 

its  scope ;  its  primary  datum  was  the  Eternal  God,  and  its  secondary- 
was  the  created  universe,  especially  the  man  who  bore  the  image  of  his 
Maker.  This  man  was  no  mere  individual  or  insulated  unit,  but  a  race  — 
a  connected,  coherent,  organic  unity.  The  human  being  was  local,  but 
human  nature  was  universal ;  before  the  individual  could  be,  the  whole 
must  exist ;  and  so  man  must  be  interpreted  in  terms  of  mankind  rather 
than  mankind  in  the  terms  of  the  single  and  local  man.  And  this  signified 
that  in  character,  as  well  as  in  nature,  the  race  was  a  unity  ;  the  past 
made  the  present,  the  heir  became  as  his  inheritance  ;  and  so  any  change 
in  man  had  to  be  effected  by  the  Maker  and  not  by  those  He  had  made. 
And  here  Augustine  pointed  the  way  to  the  goal  which  Paul  had  readied  : 
the  will  of  God  had  never  ceased  to  be  active,  for  it  was  infinite  ;  and  it 
could  not  cease  to  be  gracious,  for  it  was  holy  and  perfect ;  therefore,  from 
this  will,  since  man's  nature  was  by  his  corporate  being  and  his  inevit- 
able inheritance  evil,  all  the  good  he  could  ever  be  or  achieve  must  come. 
This  fundamental  idea  was  common  to  the  types  most  characteristic 
of  the  Teutonic  Renaissance.  It  was  expressed  in  Luther's  Servum 
Arbitrium,  in  Zwingli's  Providentia  Aetuosa,  in  Calvin's  Decretum  Ahsolu- 
tum.  These  all  signified  that  the  sole  causality  of  good  belonged  to  God, 
that  grace  was  of  the  essence  of  His  will,  and  that  where  He  so  willed, 
man  could  not  but  be  saved,  and,  where  He  did  not  so  will,  no  ameliora- 
tion of  state  was  possible.  But  this  must  not  be  interpreted  to  mean 
that  man  had  been  created  and  constituted  of  God  for  darkness  rather 
than  light ;  on  the  contrary,  these  thinkers  all  agree  in  alfirming  a 
universal  light  of  nature,  i.e.  ideas  implanted  in  us  by  the  Creator,  or,  as 
Melanchthon  phrased  it,  "  Notitiae  nohiscum  nascentes  divinitiis  sparsae 
inmentibus  nostris.''  In  this  position  they  were  more  influenced  by  Paul 
than  by  Augustine ;  with  the  Apostle,  they  argued  that  the  moral  law 
had  been  written  in  the  heart  before  it  was  printed  on  tables  of  stone, 
and  that  without  the  one  the  other  could  neither  possess  authority  nor 
be  understood.  But  they  also  argued  that  knowledge  without  obedience 
was  insufficient ;  and  therefore  they  held  God's  will  to  be  needed  to 
enable  man  both  to  will  and  to  do  the  good.  But  their  differences  of 
statement  and  standpoint  were  as  instructive  as  their  agreements.  When 
Luther  affirmed  the  absolute  bondage  of  the  will  and  Calvin  the  absolute 
decree  of  God,  the  one  looked  at  the  matter  as  a  question  of  man's  need, 
the  other  as  a  question  of  God's  power ;  and  so  they  agreed  in  idea 
though  they  differed  in  standpoint.  Yet  the  difference  proved  to  be 
more  radical  than  the  agreement.  And  so,  when  Zwingli  said  "lie 
would  rather  share  the  eternal  lot  of  a  Socrates  or  a  Seneca  than  that  of 
the  Pope,"  he  meant  that  God  willed  good  to  men  who  were  outside  the 
Church  or  the  covenants,  without  willing  tlie  means  which  both  Luther 
and  Calvin  conceived  to  be  necessary  to  salvation.  It  is  through  such 
differences  as  these  that  the  types  and  tendencies  of  Teutonic  thought 
must  be  conceived  and  explained. 


714  Luther.  —  Jakob  Boelime 

Luther's  Article  of  a  Standing  or  Failing  Church,  Justification  by 
Faith  alone,  is  the  positive  side  of  the  idea  which  is  negatively  expressed 
as  the  bondage  of  the  will  ;  and  the  idea  in  both  its  positive  and  negative 
forms  implies  a  philosophy  of  existence  which  may  be  stated  as  a  question 
thus :  How  is  God,  as  the  source  of  all  good,  related  to  man  as  the  seat 
and  servant  of  evil  ?  God  and  man,  good  as  identical  with  God  and  evil 
as  inseparable  from  man,  are  recognised,  and  the  problem  is :  how  is  the 
good  to  overcome  the  evil  ?  The  man  who  frames  the  problem  is  a  mystic ; 
God  is  the  supreme  desire  and  delight  of  his  soul ;  and  he  conceives  sin 
as  a  sort  of  inverted  capacity  for  God,  the  dust  which  has  stifled  a  thirst 
and  turned  it  into  an  infinite  misery.  Now,  Luther  has  two  forms  under 
which  he  conceives  God's  relation  to  man,  a  juristic  denoted  by  the  term 
"justification,"'  and  a  vital  denoted  by  the  term  "faith."  "Justifica- 
tion "  is  the  acquittal  of  the  guilty  :  "  faith  is  nothing  else  than  the  true 
life  realised  in  God."  The  one  term  thus  describes  the  universe  as 
ethically  governed,  while  the  other  describes  man  as  capable  of  partici- 
pating in  the  eternal  life  ;  and  the  two  together  mean  that  he  can  realise 
his  happiness  or  his  end  only  as  he  shares  the  life  of  God  and  lives  in  har- 
mony with  His  law.  The  philosopliy  here  implied  is  large  and  sublime, 
though  its  intrinsic  worth  may  be  hidden  by  the  crudity  of  its  earliest 
forms.  The  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  communicatio  idiomatum  attempts, 
for  example,  to  establish  a  kind  of  equation  between  the  ideas  of  God  and 
man.  The  person  of  Christ  is  a  symbol  of  humanit}'^ ;  in  it  man  can  so 
participate  as  to  share  its  perfections  and  dignity.  Christ's  humanity  is 
capable  of  deity ;  God  lives  in  Him  now  openly,  now  cryptically,  but 
ever  really ;  and  His  humanity  so  penetrates  the  Deity  as  to  touch  Him 
with  a  feeling  of  our  infirmities  and  make  Him  participant  in  our  lot  as 
we  are  in  His  life. 

This  is  the  very  root  and  essence  of  German  mysticism,  which  gives 
to  the  German  hymns  their  beauty  and  their  pathos,  which  inspired 
the  speculations  of  Brenz  and  Chemnitz,  and  which  later  determined 
Schelling's  doctrine  of  "indifference"  or  the  "identity  of  subject  and 
object,"  and  Hegel's  "absolute  idealism."  If  we  read  Boehme  from 
this  point  of  view,  how  splendid  his  dreams  and  how  reasonable  his  very 
extravagances  become  !  We  are  not  surprised  to  hear  him  speak  of  the 
necessity  of  antitheses  to  all  being,  and  especially  to  the  life  and  thought 
of  God,  of  evil  being  as  necessary  as  good,  or  wrath  as  essential  as  love 
in  God,  who  is  the  fundament  of  hell  as  well  as  of  heaven,  both  the 
everlasting  No,  and  the  eternal  Yes.  He  dwells  in  nature  as  the  soul 
dwells  in  the  body  ;  there  is  no  point  in  the  body  where  the  soul  is  not, 
no  spot  in  space  and  no  atom  in  nature  where  we  can  say,  "  God  is  not 
here."  The  man  who  is  His  image,  who  is  holy  as  He  is  holy,  good  as 
He  is  good,  is  of  no  other  matter  than  God.  This  may  be  Pantheism, 
but  it  is  not  rational  and  reasoned  like  Bruno's ;  it  is  emotional  and 
felt,  a  thing  of  imagination  all  compact.     It  is  born  of  the  love  that 


The  Aiiitbaptisls. —  The  will  of  God  715 


loses  the  sense  of  personal  distinctness  and  identity  in  the  joy,  not  of 
absolute  possession,  but  of  being  possessed.  Hoehrae  says  that  the  pro- 
cesses of  nature  conceal  God,  but  tlie  spirit  of  man  reveals  Him  ;  and  how 
can  it  reveal  a  God  it  does  not  know  ?  But  the  spirit  that  has  never 
seen  and  touched  Deity  has  never  known  Him  or  been  so  one  with  Him 
as  to  know  Him  as  he  knows  himself.  Here  lives  tlie  very  soul  of  Luther 
and  the  essence  of  all  his  thought.  Boehme's  friend  and  biographer 
describes  him  as  a  little  man  of  mean  aspect,  thin  voice,  snub  nose,  but 
eyes  blue  as  heaven,  bright  and  gleaming  like  the  windows  of  Solomon's 
temple.  And  he  lived  in  harmony  with  lines  which  he  wrote  with  liis 
own  toil-stained  hand  : 

"  Wem  Zeit  ist  wie  Eicigkeit 

Und  Etoigkeit  ivie  Zeit, 

Der  ist  hefreit 

Von  allem  Streit." 

Of  course,  such  a  change  as  Luther  instituted  could  not  but  power- 
fully affect  the  minds  of  men.  But  certain  concomitants  must  not  be 
set  down  as  effects  ;  and  the  Peasants'  War  had  its  causes  in  centuries 
of  German  history,  though  among  its  occasions  must  be  reckoned  the 
ideas  which  the  Reformation  had  thrown  as  it  were  into  the  air.  But 
quite  otherwise  was  it  with  the  Anabaptist  movement.  While  it  sprang 
up  and  flourished  in  provinces  and  cities  where  Zwingli  was  potent 
as  well  as  in  places  more  expressly  Lutheran,  yet  it  belonged  more 
specifically  to  the  Lutheran  than  to  the  Reformed  Church.  To  discuss 
its  causes  and  forms  would  carry  us  far  beyond  our  available  space.  It  is 
enougli  to  say  :  the  principle  of  parity  which  it  emphasised  was  more 
antagonistic  to  the  one  Church  than  to  the  other.  Luther  created  his 
Church  by  the  help  of  Princes  ;  Calvin  founded  his  on  the  goodwill  of 
the  people.  The  system  that  claimed  fullest  freedom  for  the  individual 
could  find  less  fault  with  the  latter  than  with  the  former.  And  it  is 
significant  that  the  heresies  which  troubled  the  Lutherans  were  largely 
political  and  social,  while  those  that  afflicted  the  Reformed  were  mainly 
intellectual  and  moral.  In  nothing  is  the  character  of  a  Society  more 
revealed  than  in  the  heresies  to  which  it  is  most  liable. 

Zwingli  and  Calvin  alike  conceived  God  under  the  category  of  will, 
and  construed  man  and  history  through  it.  Both  held  faith  to  be  a  con- 
sequence of,  rather  than  a  condition  for,  election  ;  man  believed  because 
God  had  so  decreed,  and  into  His  will  every  step  in  their  upward  or 
downward  progress  was  resolved.  Now,  this  emphasis  on  the  will  of  (iod 
necessarily  threw  into  prominence  the  ideas  of  God  and  will,  with  the 
result  that  the  main  varieties  of  opinion  in  the  Reformed  (-hurch 
concerned  these  two  ideas.  If  the  will  of  God  was  the  supreme  and  sole 
causality  in  all  human  affairs,  and  if  the  will  always  was  as  the  nature 
was,  it  became  a  matter  of  primary  consequence  to  know  what  kind  of 
being  God  was,  and  what  His  nature  and  character.    This  question  was 


716  Heretical  views  of  the  Deity 

early  and  potently  raised,  and  in  a  most  significant  quarter.  Zanchius, 
himself  an  Italian,  who  so  emphasised  the  will  of  God  as  to  anticipate 
Spinoza  and  represent  God  as  the  only  free  Being  in  nature  and  the  sole 
cause  in  history,  wrote  in  1565  to  Bullinger  warning  him  against  being 
too  easy  in  the  matter  of  credentials  of  orthodoxy,  as  he  had  many 
heretical  compatriots.  '■'•  Hispanus  (^Servetus)  gallinas  peperit ;  Italia 
fovet  ova;  nos  jam  pipientes  pullos  audimus.'"  And  it  is  curious  that 
the  attempts  to  find  a  simpler  conception  of  God  than  Calvin's,  or  to 
modify  his  notion  of  the  will  by  the  notion  of  the  Deity  whose  will  it 
was,  came  mainly  from  men  of  Latin  stock.  Servetus  was  the  son  of  a 
Spanish  father  and  a  French  mother  ;  Lelio  and  Fausto  Sozzini,  uncle 
and  nephew,  the  one  the  father  of  the  doctrine,  the  other  of  the  sect, 
which  respectively  bear  their  name,  were  Italians,  as  were  also  Bernardino 
Ochino,  who  wrote  a  once  famous  book  concerning  the  freedom  and 
bondage  of  the  will,  "  the  Labyrinth,'''  in  which  he  argued  that  man 
ought  to  act  as  if  he  were  free,  but  when  he  did  good  he  was  to  give  all 
the  glory  to  God  as  if  he  were  necessitated,  and  Celio  Secondo  Curione, 
who  desired  to  enlarge  the  number  of  the  elect  till  it  should  comprehend 
Cicero  as  well  as  Paul  ;  while  Sebastian  Castellio,  who  is  described  by 
some  contemporaries  as  French,  though  by  others  as  Italian  —  as  a  matter 
of  fact  he  was  born  in  a  Savoyard  village  not  far  from  Geneva  —  argued 
that  as  God  is  good  His  will  must  be  the  same,  and  if  all  had  happened 
according  to  it  there  could  have  been  no  sin .  These  views  may  be  regarded 
as  the  recrudescence  of  the  Latin  Renaissance  in  the  Reformed  Church, 
and  are  marked  as  attempts  to  bring  in  a  humaner  and  sweeter  conception 
of  God.  They  failed,  possibly  because  of  the  severity  and  efficiency  of 
the  Reformed  legislation,  or  possibly  because  they  did  not  reckon  with 
the  Augustinian  sense  of  sin,  or  most  probably  for  reasons  which  were 
both  political  and  intellectual.  It  is  indeed  strange,  that  positions  so 
strongly  rational  and  so  well  and  powerfully  argued  should  not  have 
been  maintained  and  crystallised  into  important  religious  societies  ;  but 
as  Boehme  helps  us  to  see,  the  man  who  knows  himself  to  be  evil  expects 
and  appreciates  wrath  as  well  as  mercy  in  God.  This  may  be  the  reason 
why  the  attempts  made  by  some  of  the  finest  minds  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury to  soften  the  severer  ideas  of  Deity  seemed  to  their  contemporaries 
heresies,  and  seem  to  the  student  of  history  ineffective  failures. 

The  problem  was  soon  attacked  from  another  side.  The  field  in 
which  the  will  of  God  was  exercised  was  the  soul  of  man.  That  will 
concerned,  therefore,  him  and  his  acts  ;  if  these  acts  were  done  because 
God  had  so  determined,  then  two  consequences  followed  :  the  acts  would 
show  the  quality  of  the  will,  and  the  man  would  not  be  consciously  free, 
would  know  himself  an  instrument  rather  than  an  agent.  The  criticism 
from  these  points  of  view  was  mainl}^  northern  ;  those  who  urged  it  did 
so  in  the  interests  of  man  and  morality.  In  Calvin's  own  lifetime  the 
doctrine  of  foreordination,  or  of  the  operation  of  the  Divine  will  in  its 


The  pk  Uosophy  of  Predestination  717 

relation  to  human  affairs,  was  assailed  by  two  men  —  Albert  Pighius,  a 
Catholic  from  the  Netherlands,  and  Jerome  Hermes  Bolsec,  a  Parisian, 
an  unfrocked  Carmelite  monk,  wlio  had  turned  [)liysician,  and  had  for  a 
time  been  closely  attached  to  Calvin.  The  former  argued  that  if  God 
was  the  absolute  cause  of  all  events  and  acts,  then  to  Ilim  we  owed, 
not  only  the  goodness  of  the  good,  but  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked  ; 
the  second,  that  if  faith  is  made  the  consequence  rather  than  the 
condition  of  election,  then  God  must  be  charged  with  partiality.  But 
towards  the  end  of  the  century  a  more  serious  movement  took  place. 
The  question  of  the  Divine  will  had  exercised  the  Reformed  theologians, 
especially  as  criticism  had  compelled  them  to  consider  it  in  relation  to 
sin  as  well  as  to  salvation,  i.e.  both  as  to  the  causation  of  tlie  state  from 
which  man  was  to  be  saved,  and  as  to  his  deliverance  from  it.  Certain 
of  the  more  vigorous  Reformed  divines,  including  Beza  himself,  said  tliat 
the  decree  in  date  precedes  the  Fall,  for  what  was  first  in  the  Divine 
intention  is  last  in  execution  ;  the  first  thing  was  the  decree  to  save, 
but  if  man  is  to  be  saved  he  must  first  be  lost ;  hence  the  Fall  is  decreed 
as  a  consequence  of  the  decreed  Salvation.  But  the  milder  divines  said 
that  the  decree  of  God  takes  the  existence  of  sin  for  granted,  deals  with 
man  as  fallen,  and  elects  or  rejects  him  for  reasons  we  cannot  perceive, 
though  it  clearly  knows  and  regards.  The  former  were  known  by  the 
name  of  supralapsarians,  and  the  latter  by  the  name  of  sublapsarians. 
In  the  seventeenth  century  an  acute  and  effective  criticism  was  directed 
against  both  forms  of  the  belief,  Avhich,  although  it  falls  Ijeyond  our  scope, 
must  receive  passing  notice  liere.  Jacobus  Arminius  (Jakob  Herman), 
a  Dutch  preacher  and  professor,  declined  to  recognise  tlie  doctrine  as 
either  Scriptural  or  rational.  He  held  that  it  made  (lod  the  autlior  of 
sin,  that  it  restricted  His  grace,  that  it  left  the  multitudes  outside 
without  hope,  that  it  condemned  multitudes  for  believing  the  truth, 
viz.  that  for  them  no  salvation  Avas  either  intended  or  provided  in 
Christ,  and  it  gave  an  absolutely  false  security  to  those  who  believed 
themselves  to  be  the  elect  of  God.  The  criticism  was  too  rational  to  be 
cogent,  for  it  was,  as  it  were,  an  assertion  of  the  rights  of  man  over 
against  the  sovereignty  of  God.  And  it  involved  the  men  who  })ursued 
it  in  the  political  controversies  and  conflicts  of  the  time.  The  Arminians 
were  most  successful  when  the  argument  proceeded  on  principles  sup- 
plied by  the  conscience  and  the  consciousness  of  man  ;  and  tlie  Calvinists 
when  they  argued  from  the  majesty  and  the  might  of  God.  But  if  tlie 
Arminians  were  dialectically  victors,  tliey  were  politically  vanquished. 
The  men  who  organised  authority  in  Holland  proved  stronger  than  those 
who  pleaded  and  suffered  for  freedom. 

There  are  still  large  fields  of  thought  to  be  traversed  before  we  can 
do  even  approximate  justice  to  the  mind  of  Protestantism  ;  but  our  space 
is  exliausted.  All  we  can  now  do  is  to  drop  a  liint  as  to  wliat  was 
intended  ;  we  should  have  wished  to  sketch  the  Renaissance  that  followed 


718  The  new  scholarship 

the  Reformation  as  fully  as  the  literary  Revival  which  preceded  it. 
Theodore  Beza  is  a  man  whose  fame  as  a  Genevan  legislator  and  divine 
has  eclipsed  his  name  as  a  scholar  and  educator  ;  but  it  ought  not  to  be 
forgotten  that  he  was  an  elegant  humanist  before  he  became  a  convinced 
reformer  and  his  most  fruitful  work  was  done  in  the  provinces  of  sacred 
learning  and  exegesis.  The  Estiennes,  Robert  and  Henry,  are  potent 
names  in  the  history  of  Greek  and  Roman  letters  ;  they  accomplished 
much  for  the  languages  and  the  literatures  which  they  loved  •,  —  Robert, 
in  particular,  standing  out  as  a  devoted  friend  of  religion  and  of  science, 
for  both  of  which  he  made  immense  sacrifices.  Our  textus  receptus 
and  its  division  into  verses  are  witnesses  to  his  zeal.  Joseph  Scaliger 
and  Isaac  Casaubon  had  the  merit  of  awakening  the  envy,  which  was  but 
inverted  admiration,  and  the  supple  hate,  which  was  like  the  regret  of  the 
forsaken,  of  the  society  whose  mission  it  was  to  roll  back  the  advancing 
tide  of  the  freer  thought  that  had  come  to  quicken  interest  in  letters  ; 
while  Gerard  Jan  Vossius  construed  the  classical  mythology  through 
religion,  and  both  through  Old  Testament  history  in  a  way  that  con- 
tributed to  form  comparative  science  in  the  regions  of  thought,  religion, 
and  language.  Protestant  scholars  had  a  larger  and  more  realistic  way 
of  looking  at  classical  problems  than  the  men  of  the  earlier  Renaissance, 
and  by  its  dissociation  from  polity  and  custom  Teutonic  thought,  even 
while  it  seems  narrower  in  scope,  is  yet  far  wider  in  outlook  and  interest 
than  Latin.  It  goes  into  a  more  distant  past,  and  rises  to  higher 
altitudes.  It  came  as  a  revolt,  but  it  grew  into  a  development  ;  it  con- 
tinued free  from  the  authority  that  would  have  suppressed  it,  and  used 
its  freedom  to  achieve  results  which  the  more  fettered  Latin  mind  panted 
after  in  vain.  France  continued  in  the  seventeenth  century  the  literary 
activity  of  Italy  in  the  sixteenth  ;  but  speculation  loves  freedom,  and 
refused  to  live  where  it  could  not  be  free.  The  events,  which  emanci- 
pated England  from  monotonous  uniformity  in  religion,  set  the  problems 
that  have  been  the  main  factors  in  her  historical  development,  and  the 
chief  causes  of  her  philosophical  activity  and  her  literary  greatness. 
Modern  thought  is  the  achievement  of  Northern  and  Central  Europe, 
but  it  is  the  possession  of  universal  man. 


CHAPTERS   I,    II,   AND   III 

MEDICEAN   ROME,   AND   HABSBURG   AND   V ALOIS 

BIBLIOGRAPHIES 

Armstrong,  E.,  Charles  V.     2  vols.     London.     1902. 

Franklin,  A.     Lcs  Sources  de  I'Histoire  de  France.     Paris.     1877. 

Langlois,  C  V.,  and  Stein,  II.     Les  Archives  de  I'Histoire  de  France.     Paris.     1893. 

Manno,  A.     Bibliogratia  storica  della  monarchia  de  Savoia.     Turin.     1884  etc. 

Mazzatinti,  G.     Gli  archivi  della  Storia  d'  Italia.     Rocca  S.  Casciano.     1897-8.     (In 

progress.) 
Monod,  G.    Bibliographic  de  I'Histoire  de  France.     Paris.     1888. 
Pastor,  L.     Geschichte   der  Papste.     Vol.  iii.     Freiburg  i.   B.     1895.     Translated   by 

F.  I.  Antrobus.     Vols,  v  and  vi.     London.     1891. 
Pirenne,  H.     Bibliographie  de  I'histoire  de  Belgique.     2nd  ed.     Brussels.     1902. 


PUBLISHED   DOCUMENTS 

Alberi,  E.     Relazioni  degli  Arabasciatori  Veneti.     Series  i,  1,  2,  3,  4,  6.     Series  ii,  1,  2. 

5.     Florence.     1846-62. 
Boislisle,  A.  M.  de.     Chambre  des  Comptes  de  Paris.     Pieces  justiflcatives  pour  servir 

a  I'histoire  des  premiers  presidents.     1506-1791.     Paris.     1893. 
Charles  V. 

Bradford,  "W.     Correspondence  of  the  Emperor  Charles  V  and  his  ambassadors 

...  from  ...  Vienna.     Edited  b}'  W.  Bradford.     London.     1850. 
Casanova,  E.     Lettere  di  Carlo  V  a  Clemente  VII.     1527-33.     Florence.     1893. 
DoUinger,  J.  J.     Bcitrage  zur  politischen,   kirchlichen,    und   Kultur-Geschichte. 

Vols.  I,  u.     Ratisbon.     1862. 
Gachard,  P.     Correspondance  de  Charles  Quint  et  d'AihMan  VI.     Brussels.     1859. 
Kervyn  de  Lettenhove.     Commentaires  do  Cliarles  Quint.     A  revision  of  a  Por- 
tuguese translation  of  the  Spanish  original.     Brussels.     1862. 
Lanz,  K.     Correspondenz   des   Kaisers   Karl   V.     Aus   dem    kciniglichen  Archiv 
und  der  Bibliothfeque  de  Bourgogue  zu  Briissel.     Leii>zig.      1844-6. 

Staatspapiere  zur  Gesch.   Karls  V.     Aus  der  Bibl.  de   Bonrgogne.    Stutt- 
gart.    1845. 

Aktenstucke  zur  Gesch.  Karis  V.     Aus  dem  k.  k.   ilof-  und  Staatsarchiv 

zu  Wien.     Monumenta  Habsbursica.     Part  ii. 

Clement  VII.     La  politica  di  Clemente  VH,  fiuo  al  sacco  di   Roma.     Sccoudo  i  docu- 
ment! Vaticaui.     Rome.     1884. 

719 


720         Medicecm  Rome,  and  Hahshurg  and  Valois 

Collection  des  documents  inedits  de  I'Histoire  de  France. 

XXXVI.     Nesoriations  de  la  France  avec  la  Toscane.     Edd.  G.  Canestrini  and  A. 
Dusjardins.    Vols,  ii,  ni.     1861-9. 

xLiv.        Negociations  diplomatiques   eutre  la  France   et  I'Autriche   durant  les 
trente  premieres  anuees  du  xvi"  Siecle.     Ed.  le  Glay.     2  vols.     1845. 

XXVI.        Captivity  du  roi  Fran9ois  I.     Ed.  A.  CliampoUion-Figeac.     1847. 

XLvn.       Negociations  de  la  France  dans  le  Levant.     Ed.  E.  Charri^re.     Vols,  i,  ii. 
1848. 

XLvni.     delations  des  Ambassadeurs  Venitiens  sur  les  affaires  de  France  au  xvi^ 
Siecle.     Ed.  N.  Tommaseo.     2  vols.     1838. 

XLix.        Papiers  d'etat  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle.     Ed.  Ch.  Weiss.     Vols.  i-v. 
1841-3. 
Lettres  de  Catherine  de  M^dicis.     Ed.  H.  la  Ferriere.    Vol.  i  (1533-63). 
1880. 
Diane  de  Poitiers  (Diane  de  Brez^,  Duchesse   de  Valentinois).     Lettres   inedites  de 

Diane  de  Poitiers,  publiees  avec  une  introduction  et  des  notes  par  G.  Guiffrey. 

Paris.     1866. 
Document!  ispano-genovesi  dell'  Archivio  di  Siraancas.     Ed.    M.    Spinola  etc.     Atti 

della  Society  Ligure  di  Storia  patria.     Vol.  vin,  Fasc.  1,  2. 
Farnese,  Cardinal.     Lettere  scritte  a  nome  del  Card.  Farnese.    Ed.  A.  Caro.    3  vols. 

(rv-vi  of  Opere).     Milan.     1807. 
Francis  I.     Catalogue  des  Actes  de  Francois  I.     7  vols.     Paris.     Impriraerie  nationale. 

1887-96. 
Fredericq,  P.     Corpus  documentorum  inquisitionis  liaereticae  pravitatis  Neerlandicae. 

Ghent.     5  vols.,  to  Dec.  1528.     1889-1903. 
Guiffrey,  G.     Procfes  criminel  de  Jehan  de  Poitiers,  seigneur  de  Saint  Vallier.     1867. 
Laemmer,  H.     Monumenta  Vaticana  historiam  ecclesiasticam  saeculi  xvi,  illustrantia. 

Freiburg  i.  B.     1861. 
Laurent,  C,  and  Lamure,  J.  Recueil  des  ordonnances  des  Pays  Bas,  2°  S6rie.    1506-1700. 

Brussels.     1898. 
Leonls  X,  P.  M.,  Regesta.     Ed.  Card.  Hergenrother.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1884-5. 
Loaysa,  G.  de.     Cartas  al  Emperador  Carlos  V  .  .  .   1530-2  por  su  Confesor.     Edited 

by  G.  Heine.     Berlin.     1848.     German  translation  published  separately. 
Marguerite  d'Angouleme.     Lettres  de  Marguerite  d'A.  reine  de  Navarre.     Published  by 

A.  Geuin.     Societe  de  I'Histoire  de  France.     1841-2. 
Molini,  G.     Documenti  di  Storia  Italiana.     1522-30.     2  vols.    Florence.     1836-7. 
Morone,  G.     Ricordi  inediti  di  G.  Morone,  Gran  Cancelliere  dell'  ultimo  Duca  di  Milano 

.  .  .  pubblicati  del  C.  TuUio  Dandolo  .  .  .     Milan.     1855. 
Pacheco,  J.  F.,  and  Cardinas,  F.  de.    Coleccion  de  documentos  inSditos  relativos  al  des- 

cubrimento  y  colonizacion  de  las  posesiones  espanolas   en  America  y  Oceania. 

Madrid.     1864. 
Pellicier,  G.     Correspondance  politique  de  Guillaume  Pellicier,  ambassadeur  de  France 

aVenise.    Ed.  A.  Jausserat-Radel.     Commission  des  Archives  historiques.    Paris. 

1899. 
Pieper,  A.     Die  papstlichen  Legaten  und  Nuntlen  in  Deutschland,  Frankreich  und 

Spanien,  1550-9.     Munster.     1897. 
Ribier,  G.     Lettres  et  Memoires  d'Estat.     Paris.     1666. 

Saige,  G.     Documents  historiques  relatifs  a  la  principaut^  de  Monaco.     1891. 
Serristori,  A.     Legazioni  di  A.  Serristori,  ambasciadore  di  Cosimo  I,  a  Carlo  Quinto 

e  in  corti  di  Roma.     Ed.  L.  Canestrini.     Florence.     1853. 
Virz,  C.     Akten  liber  die  diploraatischen  Beziehungen  der  romischen  Kurie   zu  der 

Schweiz,  1512-52.     Basel.     1895. 

For  State  Papers  published  in  England  see  Bibliographies  of  Chapters  XIII.-XVI. 


Bihliofjraplnj  721 


CONTEMPORARY    HISTORIES,    CHRONICLES,    MEMOIRS,    ETC. 

BarcU,  A.     Carlo  V  e  I'  assedio  di  Firenze  (1528-30).    Arch.  Stor.  Ital.     1893. 
Barrillon,  J.    Journal  de  Jean  Barrillon,  secretaire  du  Chancelier  Duprat,   1515-21. 

Ed.  P.  de  Vaissiere  for  Soci(5t(5  de  I'hist.  de  France,  1897. 
Belcarius,  F.     Historia  Gallica,  1461-1581.     Venice.     1581. 
Berabo,  P.    (Cardinal).      Opere.     4  vols.     Venice.     1729.      In  CoUezione  dci  Classic! 

Italiaui.     Vols.  55-66.     Milan.     1808-12. 
Bodin,  J.     Les  six  livres  de  la  R6publique.     Paris.     1583. 
Boyin,  F.  de,  Baron  dn  Villars.     Menioircs  sur  les  guerres  de  Piedmont.     Paris.     1607. 

Michaud  et  Poujoulat,  x.     Petitot,  .\xxiii-vii. 
Brantorae,  P.  de  Bourdeille,  S'"  de.     Edited  by  L.  Lalaune.     Soc.  de  I'Hist.  de  France. 

Paris.     1864-82. 
Carloix,  V.     Meinoires  de  la  Vie  de  Francois  de  Scepeaux,  Sire  de  Vieilleville,  1527-71. 

5  vols.     Paris.     1757.     Also  in  Petitot,  xxvi-x.win. 
Casa,  G.  Delia.     Opere,  i,  n.     Venice.     1752. 
Castiglione,  B.     II  libro  del  Cortegiano.     Venice.     1528,  etc. 
Cellini,  Benvenuto.     Vita,  da  lui  niedesimo  scritta.     Naples.     1730.    Rome.     1901,  etc. 

Translated  by  T.  Roscoe.     London.    1822.    By  J.  A.  Symonds.    London.    1888,  etc. 
Ciraber,  L.  et  Danjou,  F.     Archives  curieuses  de  I'histoire  de  France,     l*-  s6rie.    Paris. 

1835. 

III.     Brief  discours  du  si^ge  de  Metz. 
Le  discours  de  la  prinse  de  Calais. 

Histoire  particuliere  de  la  Cour  du  roy  Henry  II  (by  Claude  de  I'Aubespine). 
Lc  siege  et  priuse  de  Thionville. 
Cini,  C.  B.     Vita  del  Signor  Cosirao  de'  Medici.     Florence.     1611. 
Clementis  VII  Epistolae  per  Sadoletum  scriptae.     Ed.  P.  Balan.     Monumenta  saeculi 

XVI  historiam  illustrantia.     Innsbruck.     1885. 
Coligny,  G.  de.     Siege  de  Saint  Quentin.     Michaud,  vni.     Petitot,  xi,. 
Cronique  du  roi  Francoys  premier.     Ed.  G.  Guiffrey  for  Soc.  de  I'hist.  de  France. 

Paris.     1860. 
Du  Bellay,  M.  and  G.     MSmoires  1513-52.     Michaud  et  Poujoulat,  v. 
Ferronus,  A.     Pauli  Aemilii  historiae  continuatio  usq.  ad  an.  1547.     Paris.     1550. 
Giustiniani,  A.     Annali  della  Repubblica  di  Genova.     Genoa.     1537.     Ed.  V.  Canepa. 

2  vols.     Genoa.     1854. 
Gosellini,  G.     Compendio  storico  della  guerra  di  Parma  et  del  I'icdmonte,  1548-73.     In 

Misc.  di  Storia  Ital.     xvii.     Turin.     1878. 
Grassis,  Paris  de.     II  Diario  di  Leone  X.     Ed.  M.  Armellini.     Rome.     1884. 
Guicciardini,  F.     Opere  inedite.     Ed.  Canestrini.     10  vols.     Florence.     1856-67. 

Storia  d'  Italia.     4  vols.     Milan.     1889. 

Guise,  F.  de.     .Alemoires.     Michaud  et  Poujoulat,  vi.     Paris.     1839. 

Journal  d'un  bourgeois  de  Paris  sous  le  regne  de  Francois  I,  1515-36.     Edited  by  M.  L. 

C.  Lalanne  for  the  Soc.  de  I'hist.  de  France.     Paris.     1854. 
Jovius,  P.     Historiarum  sui  temporis  libri  xiv.     1494-1547.     Florence.     1550-2. 

Vita  Leonis  decimi.     Florence.     1548,  etc. 

La   Mothe   Fenelon,  B.  de   Salignac,  Marquis   dc.     Le  voyage  du  Roy  (Henri  II,  de 
France)  aux  pays  bas  de  I'Empercur  en  I'an  Mnuiii.     Paris.     1554. 

Le  Siege  de  Metz  en  I'an  1.--52.     Paris.    1553.     Ed.  F.  M.  Chabcrt.     Metz.    1856. 

Michaud,  viii.     Petitot,  xxxix,  xl. 

Louise  de  Savoie.     Journal.     1476-1522.     Michaud  et  Poujoulat,  v. 

Mameranus,  N.     Commentarius  de  ultima  Caroli  V  expeditione,  1544,  adversus  Gallos 

suscepta.     In  S.  A.  Wiirdtweiss,  Subsidia  diplomatica.     No.  306.    x.    Heidelberg. 

1772-80. 

.    .,    „    „  46 


722         Mediceaii  Rome,  and  Hahshurg  and  Valois 

Montluc,  B.  de.     Commentaires  et  lettres,  1521-76.     Michaud,  vii.     Ed.  A.  de  Ruble, 

for  Soc.  Hist.  France.     5  vols.     Paris.     1864-72. 
Nardi,  J.     Le  Historic  della  citta  di  Fiorenza,    1494-1531.      Ed.    A.    Gelli.     2   vols. 

Florence.     1858. 
Navagero,  A.    II  viaggio  fatto  in  Spagna  et  in  Francia  con  la  descrizione  etc.     Venice. 

1563. 
Paradin,  G.     Histoire  de  notre  temps,  1515-56.     Lyons.     1558. 
Pierragues,  A.  D.     Giornali  del  Principe  d'  Orange   nelle   Guerre   d'  Italia,  1526-30. 

Florence.     1898. 
Pitti,  J.     Istoria  Fiorentina.     Archivio  Storico  Ital.     Vol.  i.     Florence.     1842. 
Queiitin,  E.     Journal  du  Siege  de  Peronne,  1536.     From  ms.  of  Me  Jean  Dehaussy. 

Peronne.     1897. 
Rabutin,  F.  de.     Commentaires  des  dernieres  guerres  dans  la  Gaule  Belgique.    Paris. 

1555-9.     Michaud,  vii.     Petitot,  xxxvii-ix. 
Reisner,  A.     Historia  Herrn  Georgs  und  Herrn  Caspars  von  Frundsberg.     Frankfort. 

1572. 
Relation  des  troubles  de  Gand  sous  Charles  Quint.     Ed.  L.  P.  Gachard.     Collection  de 

Chroniqucs  beiges.     1846. 
Rochechouart,  G.  de.     M^moires,  1497-1565.     Michaud  et  Poujoulat,  viii. 
Ruscelli,  G.  etc.     Lettere  di  Principi.     Venice.     3  vols.     1564 —    . 
Salazar,  P.  de.     Coronica  del  nostro  eraperador  Carlos  V.     Sevila.     1552. 
Sandoval,  P.  de.    Historia  del  emperador  Carlos  V.    2  vols.    Pampeluna.     1618-24  etc. 
San  Quentin,  la  batalla  de.     In  Coleccion  de  Documentos  infiditos  para  la  historia  de 

Espana.     ix.     Madrid.     1846. 
Saulx-Tavanes,  Gaspard  de.     Memoires,  1530-73.     Michaud,  viii.     Petitot,  xxvi-viii. 
Scheurl,  Chr.     Geschichtbuch  der  Christenheit  von  1511-1521.     J.  C.   F.   Knaake,  in 

Jahrbiicher  d.  deutschen  Relches  und  der  Kirche  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation. 

Leipzig.     1872. 
Sepulveda,  J.  G.  de.     De  rebus  gestis  Caroli  V  libri  xxx.     Madrid.     1780. 
Sleidanus,  J.     De  statu  religiouis  et  reipublicae  Carolo  V  Caesare.     Augsburg.     1855. 

Ed.  J.  G.  Bohmer.     3  vols.     Frankfort.     1785. 
Ulloa,  A.    Vita  del  gran  Capitano  Don  F.  Gonzaga  nella  quale  ...  si  descrivono  le 

guerre  d'  Italia,  e  d'  altri  paesi,  1525-57.     Venice.     1563. 

La  vita  dell'  imperatore  Carlo  V  e  le  cose  occorse,  1500-60.     Venice.     1560. 

Varchi,  B.     Istoria  delle  guerre  della  Republica  Fiorentina  accorse  nel  tempo  che  la 

Casa  de'  Medici  s'  impadroni  del  governo.    2  vols.    Leyden.     1720. 
Vettori,  F.     Sommario  della  storia  d'  Italia  dal  1511-27.    Archivio  storico  Italiano. 

Appendice.     Vol.  vi.     1842. 


GENERAL   HISTORY   OF   THE    PERIOD 

Armstrong,  E.     Charles  the  Fifth.    2  vols.     London.     1902. 

Baumgarten,  H.     Karl  der  Ftinfte.     3  vols,  (to  1539).     Stuttgart.     1885-92. 

Leva,  G.  di.     Storia  documentata  di  Carlo  V.     5  vols. 

Maurenbrecher,  W.     Karl  V  und  die  deutschen  Protestanten,   1545-55.     Diisseldorf. 

1865. 
Mignet,  F.  A.  M.     Rivalit6  de  Francois  I  et  de  Charles  Quint.     2  vols.     Second  edition. 

Paris.     1875. 
Raumer,  F.  L.  G.  von.     Geschichte  Europas  seit  dem  Ende  des  fiinfzehnten  Jahr- 

hunderts.     Leipzig.     1832-50. 
Robertson,  W.    History  of  the  reign  of  Charles  V.     London,     1769. 


Bibliography 


SECONDARY   WORKS   AND   SPECIAL   TREATISES 


Franck  with  Lorraine 

Bacon,  J.     Life  and  times  of  Francis  I.     London.     1829. 

Belleval,  R.,  Marquis  de.     Les  fils  de  Henri  II.     La  cour,  la  ville  et  la  soci6t6  de  leur 

temps.     Taris.     1898. 
Claudin,  A.     Histoire  de  rimprimerie  en  France  aux  15«  et  16''  si6cles.     Vol.  i.     Paris. 

1900. 
Dupuy,  A.     Reunion  de  la  Bretagne  avec  la  France.     2nd  vol.     1880. 
Duvernoy,  E.     Politique  des  dues  de  Lorraine  dans  leurs  rapports  avec  la  France  et 

I'Autriche  de  1477-1545.     Nancy.     1893. 
Faguet,  E.     Seizienie  Siecle.     ;fetudes  littSraires.     Paris.     1894. 
Fitte,  S.     Das  staatsrechtliche  Verhaltniss  des  Herzogthums  Lothringcn  zum  deutschen 

Reich  seit  1542.     Strassburg.     1891. 
Gaillard,  G.  H.     Histoire  de  Francois  I,  Roi  de  France.     7  vols.     Paris.     17G6-9. 
Griessdorf,  H.  C.  J.     Der  Zug  Kaisers  Karl  V  gegeu  Metz.     Hallische  Abhandlungen 

zur  neueren  Geschichte.     xxvi.     1891. 
Hamy,  P.  A.     Frangois  I  et  Henry  VIII  a  Boulogne  1532.     Paris.     1898. 
Hanotaux,  G.     Etudes  historiques  sur  le  xvi'  et  le  xvii«  siecle  en   France.     I'aris. 

1886. 
Issleib,  S.     Moritz  v.  Sachsen  gegen  Karl  V  bis  zum  Kriegzuge  1552.      N.  Archiv  fur 

Sachs.  Gesch.     vi.     1885. 
Jacqueton,  G.     Le  Tresor  de  I'fepargne  sous  Fran9ois  I.    Revue  Historique.     Paris. 

'  1894. 
La  politique  exterieure  de  Louise  deSavoie.     Chalon  sur  Saone,  1892.     Biblio- 

theque  de  I'Ecole  pratique  des  hantes  Etudes.     Ease.  88. 
La  Ferriere,  Corate  de.     Le  xv^'  Siecle  et  les  Valois  d'apres  les  documents  in6dits  du 

Brit.  Mus.  et  du  Record  Oflice.     Paris.     1879. 
Lavisse,  E.     Histoire  de  France.    Vol.  v.     Part  i.     Paris.     1902-3. 
Madelin,   L.     Les  premieres  applications  du  Concordat  de  1516.     Melanges  de  I'Ecole 

Frangaise  de  Rome.    Vol.  xvii.     1897. 
Martin,  H.     Histoire  de  France.     Vols,  vii,  viii.     Fourth  edition.     Paris.     1878. 
Michelet,  J.     Histoire  de  France.     Vols,  x,  xi.     Paris.     1835-50. 
Paillard,  C,  and  Herelle.     L'invasion  Allemande  en  1544.     I'aris.     1884. 
Petit  de  Julleville,  L.     Histoire  de  la  langue  et  de  la  litterature  fran9aise.     Vol.  in. 

Paris.     1897. 
Pimodan,  G.,  Marquis  de.     La  reunion  de  Toul  a  la  France.     Pans.     1880. 
Pony,  L.  E.  F.     La  Bataille  de  Saint  Quentin  (1557)  d'apres  le  r6cit  de  ParC.     Saint 

Quentin.     1875. 
Rahlcnbeck,  C.  H.     Metz  et  Thionville  sous  Charles  V.     Brussels.     1881. 
Rauke,  L.  von.      Franzosische  Geschichte,  vorn.  im  16.  u.   17.  Jahrh.     Vol.  i.     Stutt- 
gart.    1852-61.     Vol.  vin  of  Sanimtliche  Werke.     Leipzig.     1874,  etc.     Trans- 
Fated  by  M.  A.  Garvey.     Vol.  i.     London.     1852. 
Rott,  E.     Histoire  de  la  representation  franijaise  en  Suisse.     Pans.     1900. 
Roy.M.     Le  Ban  et  I'Arriere-ban  du  bailiage  de  Sens  an  xvr  siecle.     Sens.     1885. 
Ruble,  A.  de.     Le  trait6  de  Cateau  Cambresis.     Paris.     1889. 
Scherer,    H.     Der  Raub  der  drei   Bisthiimcr  Metz,    Ton!,    und    Verdun,    15o2.     Hist. 

Taschenbuch  866.     1842.  ,  ,t  •     •  i   ir 

Schlomka  E.     Die  politischen  Beziehungen  zwischen  Kurflirst  Moritz  und  Hcinnch  II 

von  Frankreich  von  1550  bis  zum  Vertrag  von  Chambord,  15  Jan.  1552.     1884. 
Sisraondi,  Simonde  de.     Histoire  des  Fran^ais.     Vols,  xvi,  xvii,  xviii.     Tans.     18.U. 


724        Medicean  Rome,  and  Hahshurg  and  Valois 

Spont,   A.     Semblan9ay.     La  bourgeoisie  flnancifere   au  debut  du  16«  siecle.     Paris. 

1895. 
Marignan  et  I'organisation  militaire  sous  Francois  I.     Revue  des  Quest.  His- 

toriques,  July  1899. 
Teulet,  J.  B.  A.  T.     Relations  politiques  de  la  France  et  de  I'Espagne  avec  I'^cosse  au 

xvi*^  siecle.     Bordeaux  and  Paris.     1862. 
Trefftz,  J.     Kursachsen  und  Franlcreich,  1552-6.     Leipzig.     1891. 
Vachez,   A.     Histoire  de  I'acquisition  des  terres   nobles  par  les  roturiers   dans  les 

provinces  de  Lyonnais,  Forez  etBeaujolais  du  xiii<^  au  xvi<^  siecles.     Lyons.     1891. 
Weill,  G.    Les  theories  sur  le  pouvoir  royal  en  France  pendant  les  guerres  de  religion. 

Paris.     1892. 
Zeller,  J.     La  diplomatie  frangaise  vers  le  milieu  du  xvi-  siecle,  d'apres  la  correspon- 

dance  de  Guillaume  Pellicier.     1881. 


Rome  and  the  Medici 

Balan,  P.     Clemente  VII  e  1'  Italia  de'  suoi  tempi.     Milan.     1887. 

Brosch,  M.     Geschichte  des  Kirctienstaates.    2  vols.     Hamburg.     1880-2. 

Creighton,  M.  (Bishop).     History  of  the  Papacy  during  the  period  of  the  Reformation. 

Vol.  VI.     Loudon.     1882. 
Fe^,  C.    Notizie  iutorno  Raft'aele,  etc.  e  paragone  relativamente  del  meriti  di  Giulio  II 

e  Leone  X  sul  loro  secolo.     Rome.     1822. 
Gnoli,    D.     Roma  e  i  Papi  nel  seicento.     In  La  Vita  Italiana  nel  seicento.     Milan. 

1895. 

Descriptio  urbis   o  Censimento  della  popolazione  di  Roma  c.  1522.     Archivio 

della  Soc.  Romana  di  Sauta  Patria.     Vol.  17.     Rome.     1894. 

Hellwig,  W.     Die  politisclien  Beziehungen  Clements  VII  zu  Karl  V  im  Jahre  1526. 

Leipzig.     1889. 
Hofler,  C.  von.     Papst  Adrian  VI.     1522-3.     Vienna.     1880. 

Wahl  und   Thronbesteigung  des  letzten   deutschen  Papstes,  Adrian  VI,  1522. 

Vienna.     1872. 

Miintz,  E.    Les  arts  a  la  cour  des  Papes  pendant  le  xv  et  le  xvi^   siecle.    3rd  part. 
Bibliotlieque  des  Ecoles  frangaises  d'Atlienes  et  de  Rome.     Fasc.  xx\t^ii. 

Les  antiquites  de  la  ville  de  Rome  aux  14'',  15«,  et  le"^  siecles.     Paris.     1886. 

Les  historieus  et  les  critiques  de  Raphael.     Paris.     1883. 

Les  collections  d'antiques  formees  par  les  Medicis  au  xvi  siecle.     Acadfemie  des 

Inscriptions  et  Belles  Lettres.     Histoire  et  M^moires.     Vol.  85. 

Nitti,  F.  S.     Documenti  ed  osservazioni  riguardanti  la  politica  di  Leone  X.    Archivio 

della  Soc.  Rom.  di  Santa  Patria.     Vol.  16. 
Leone  X  e  la  sua  politica   secondo  documenti   e   carteggi   inediti.    Florence. 

1892. 
Ranke,  L.  von.     Die  roraischen  Papste.     Vols,  xxxvii-xxxix  of  Sammtliche  Werke. 

Leipzig.     1894,    etc.     English  translation   by  Mrs.    Austin.     3rd    ed.      2    vols. 

1847. 
Renazzi,  F.  M.     Storia  dell'  University  di  Roma.     4  vols.     Rome.     1803-6. 
Roscoe,  W.     Life  and  Pontificate  of  Leo  X.     4  vols.     Liverpool.     1805.     5th  edition. 

London.     1846. 
Sugenheim,  S.     Entstehung  und  Ausbildung  des  Kirchenstaates.     Leipzig.     1854. 
Villa,  A.  R.     Memorias  para  la  historia  del  asalto  y  saques  de  Roma.     Madrid.     1895. 


Italy,  Sicily,  and  Savoy 

Baguenault  de  Puchesse.     Nggociations  de  Henri  II  avec  le  Due  de  Ferrare  (1555-7). 

Le  Mans.     1869. 
Baschet,  A.     La  diplomatie  v^nitienne  au  xvi^  siecle.     Paris.     1862. 


Bihlio(jraphy  Til 


Beloch,  J.     Bevblkerungsgeschichte  der  Republik  Venedigs. 

Canale,  M.  G.     Storia  della  Kepublica  di  Geneva,  ir>28-50.     Genoa.     1874. 

Celli,  L.     Ordinanze  n)ilitari  d.  Repubblica  Veneta  nel  secolo  xvi.     Korae.     1894. 

CipoUa,  C.     Storia  delle  Signorie  Italiaue— 1530.     Milan.     1881. 

Claparede,  T.     Hist,  de  la  Reformation  en  Savoie.     Geneva.     1893. 

Costanzo.  A.  di.      Historia  del  Regno  di  Napoli.     Aquila.     1581.     Also  in  Collezione 

de' classici  Italiani.     Vols.  119-21. 
Creighton,  M.  (Bishop).     History  of  the  Papacy,  etc.     Vols,  v,  vi. 
Crespi,  L.  A.     II  seuato  di   Milano.     Ricerche  intorno  alia  costituzione  del  stato  di 

Milano  al  tempo  di  dominazione  Spagnuola. 
Ferrari,  G.     Histoire  des  revolutions  d'ltalie.     Vol.  4.     Paris.     1858. 
Grethen,  R.      Die  politischen  Beziehungen  Clements  VII  zu  Karl  V.     Hanover.     1887. 
Guicciardini,  L.     II  Sacco  di  Roma.     Paris.     1644. 
La  Liimia,  I.     La  Sicilia  sotto  Carlo  V.     1862. 
Livi,  G.     La  Corsica  e  Cosimo  I  de'  Medici.     Florence.     1885. 
Loiseleur  et  Bagueuault  de  Puchesse.     L'expedition  du  Due  de  Guise  a  Naples.     Paris. 

1876. 
Perrens,  F.  T.     Histoire  de  Florence  depuis  la  domination  des  Medici.     Vol.  3.     Paris. 

1890.     Translated  by  11.  Lynch.     London.     1892. 
Professione,  A.     Della  Battaglia  di  Pavia  al  sacco  di  Roma.     Rome.     1890. 
Randi,  C.     La  guerra  di  sette  anni  sotto  Cleraente  VII.      Arch,  della  Soc.  Rom.  di 

Storia  Patria  vi,  3  and  4. 
Reumont,  A.  von.     Beitrage  zur  italienischen  Geschichte.     6  vols.     Berlin.     1853-7. 

Geschichte  der  Stadt  Rom.     3  vols.     Berlin.     1867-70. 

Ricotti,  E.     Storia  della  Monarchia  Piemontese.     Vol.  i.     Florence.     1862. 

Romanin,  S.     Storia  documentata  di  Venezia.     Vol.  vi.     Venice.     1856. 

Rossi,  A.     Francesco  Guicciardini  e  il  governo  fiorentino,  1527-40.     2  vols.     Bologna. 

1899. 
Segre,  A.     Una  questione  fra  Carlo  III  Duca  di  Savoia  et  Don  Ferrante  Gonzaga,  1550. 

Torino.     1896. 

La  Marina  Sabauda  ai  tempi  di  Emanuele  Filiberto.     Rome.     1898. 

Sozzini,  A.     Sienese  war.     Archivio  Storico  Italiano.     n.     Florence.     1842. 
Symonds,  J.  A.     Renaissance  in  Italy.     7  vols.     London.     1875-86. 

Villa,  A.  Rodriguez.     Italia  desde  la  batalla  de  Pavia  hasta  el  saco  de  Roma.     In 
Curiosidades  de  la  historia  de  Espafia.     Madrid.     1885. 

La  Reina  Dona  Juana  la  Loca.     Madrid.     1892. 


Low  Countries  .\nd  BimcrNDT 

Alexandre,  P.     Hist,  du  Conseil  priv6  dans  les  anciens  Pays-Bas.     Brussels.     1895. 
Asch  van  Wijch,  H.  W.,  and  others.     De  Slag  bij  St  Quentin.     Utrecht.     1891. 
Biographic  Nationale  de  Belgique.     16  vols,  (to  Pepyn).     Brussels.     1866. 
Blok,  P.  J.     Geschiedenis  van  het  Niederlandische  Volk.     Vol.  ii.     Bk  v. 

Groningen.     1892  etc.     Translated  (in  abbreviated  form)  by  Ruth  Putnam.     New 

York  and  London.     Vol.  ii.     1899. 
Borraan,  C.  de.     Les  Echevins  de  la  souveraine  justice  de  Liege.     Lifcge.     1900. 
Fredericq,  P.     De  Nederlanden  onder  Keizer  Karl.     Ghent.     Willems-Fonds  Academy. 

1885  etc. 
Geschiedenis  der  Inquisitie  in  de  Nederlanden  tot  aan  hare  herinrichtung  onder 

Keizer  Karl  V,  1025-1520.     2  vols.     Ghent.     1892-7. 
Gachard,  L.  P.      Collection  des  voyages    des   souverains    des    Pays-Bas.      Vol.  iv. 

Brussels.     Commission  roy.  d'llist.     1874  etc. 
Trois  annees  de  I'histoire  de  Charles  V  d'apris  I'ambassadeur  vtnitien  Navagcro. 

Brussels.     1865. 


726         Medicean  Rome,  and  Habshurg  and  Valois 

Gomart.     Siege  et  Bataille  de  St  Quentin  (1557).     Saint  Quentin.     1859. 

Heidrich,   P.      Der   geldrisclie    Erbfolgestreit,    1537-43.      In  Beitrage   z.    deutschen 

Territorial-  und  Stadtegeschichte.     Kassel,  1895. 
Henne,  A.     Histoire  du  rfegne   de  Charles-Quint  en  Belgique.      10  vols.     Brussels. 

1858-60. 

Histoire  de  la  Belgique  sous  le  regne  de   Charles-Quint.     4  vols.     Brussels. 

1865. 

Hove,  A.  van.  lEtude  sur  les  conflits  de  juridiction  dans  le  diocese  de  Liege  a  I'fipoque 

d'Erard  de  la  Marck.     Louvain.     1900. 
Juste,  V.     Charles  V  et  Marguerite  d'Autriche.     Brussels.     1859. 
Laraure,  E.      Le  grand   Conseil  des   dues   de  Bourgogne  de  la  raaison  de  Valois. 

Brussels.     1900. 
Picardie,  La  guerre  de  1557  en.     Societe  academique  de  Saint  Quentin.     Saint  Quentin. 

1896. 
Rachfahl,  F.      Trennung  der  Niederlander   vom   deutschen   Reiche.      Westdeutsche 

Zeitschrift.     Vol.  xix,  pt  2.     1900. 
Reiffenberg,  F.  A.  F.  T.,  Baron  de.     Histoire  de  I'Ordre  de  la  Toison  d'Or.     Brussels. 

1850. 

Spain 

Bonn,  M.  J.     Spaniens  Niedergang  wahrend  der  Preis-Revolution   des   16ten  Jahr- 

hunderts.      In    Brentano  und   Lotz,  Miinchner  Volkswirthschaftliche   Studien. 

1896. 
Cappa,  R.     Estudios  criticos  acerca  la  Dominacion  Espanola  en  America.     2nd  edition. 

Madrid.     1888  etc. 
Habler,  K.     Die  wirthsehaftliche  Blute  Spaniens  im  16ten  Jahrhundert  und  ihr  Vcrfall. 

InJastrow;  Historische  Untersuchungen,  Heft  1.     Berlin.     1888. 

Die  Geschichte  der  Fuggerschen  Handlung  in  Spanien.     Weimar.     1895. 

Helps,  Sir  A.     The  Spanish  Conquest  in  America.     4  vols.     London.     1855-61. 
Lea,  H.  C.     The  Moriscos  of  Spain.     London.     1901. 

Chapters  from  the  Religious  History  of  Spain  connected  with  the  Inquisition. 

Philadelphia.     1890. 

Loubens,  M.  J.  G.    Essais  sur  I'administration  de  la  Castille  au  xvr  siecle.     Paris. 

1860. 
Uanke,  L.      Spanien  unter  Karl  V,  Philipp   II,    und  Philipp   III.      Vol.   xxxin  of 

Sammtliche  Werke.     Leipzig.     1874,  etc. 


Biography 

Bouchot,  H.     Catherine  de  M^dicis.     Paris.     1899. 

Cantini,  L.     Vita  di  Cosimo  de'  Medici.    Florence.     1805. 

Darraesteter,   A.    M.   J.      Margai'et    of    Angouleme,   Queen    of    Navarre.      London. 

1886. 
Decrue,  F.    Anne  de  Montmorency,  Grand  Maitre  et  Conn6table  de  France,  a  la  cour 

.  .  .  de  Francois  I.     Paris.     1885. 
Anne  de  Montmorency,  ConnStable  et  pair  de  France,  sous  Henri  II.     Paris. 

1889. 
Du  Prat,  A.  T.,  Marquis.     Vie  d'Antoine  Duprat.     Paris.     1857. 
Duprg-Lasale,  E.     Michel  de  I'HSpital  avant  son  elevation  au  poste  de  Chancelier  de 

France.     Paris.     1898. 
Fabroni,  A.     Magni  Cosmi  Medicei  Vita.     2  vols.     Pisa.     1789-98. 
Gachard,  L.  P.     Retraite  et  Mort  de  Charles  Quint  au  Monastere  de  Yuste.     Acad. 

Imp.  et  Royale.     Brussels.     1854-5. 
Juste,  T.     Vie  de  Marie  de  Hongrle.     Brussels.     1855. 


Biblioyrapliy  Til 


La  Mure,  J.  M.  de.     Histoire  des  Dues  de  Bourbon,  en  forme  d'annales  sur  preuves 

authentiquos.     4  vols.     Paris.     1860-97. 
Lefranc,  A.     Marguerite  de  Navarre  et  le  platouisme  de  la  Renaissance.     Bibliotli5quo 

de  I'Ecole  des  Charles.     Vols,  i.vni,  lix.     1897-8. 
Marillac,  0.  de.     Vie  du  Connfitable  de  Bourbon.     Paris.     1836. 
Moeller,  C.     lll6ouore  d'Antriclie  et  de  Bourgogne,  reine  de  France.     Paris.     1895. 
Petit,  E.     Andrea  Doria.     Paris.     1887. 
Robert,  U.     Philibert  de  Clialon,  Prince  d'Orange,  1502-30.     Boletin  de  la  R.  Acad,  de 

la  Historia.     July  to  September.     Madrid.     1901. 
Vaissiere,  P.  de.     Charles  de  Marillac,  ambassadcur  et  homme  politi(iue  .  .  .   1510-60. 

Paris.     1896. 
Stirling-Maxwell,  Sir  W.     The  Cloister   Life  of   the  Kmperor  Charles  V.     London. 

1852  etc. 
Zanoni,  E.     Vita  pubblica  di  Fr.  Guicciardini.     Bologna.     1896. 


Miscellaneous 

Burckhardt,  J.      Die  Cultur  der  Renaissance  in  Italien.      Basel.      1860.      8th  edition. 

2  vols.     Leipzig.     1901.     Translated  by  S.  G.  Middlemore.     London.     1878. 
Cat,  E.     De  Caroli  Quinti  in  Africa  Rebus  Gestis.     1891. 
Cerezeda,  M.  G.     Tratado  de  las  Campanas  .  .  .  de  los  ej6rcitos  del  Emperador  C&rlos 

V  desde  1521  hasta  1545.     Sociedad  de  Bibliofllos  Espanoles.     Madrid.     187:3-6. 
Ehrenberg,  R.     Das  Zeitalter  der  Fugger.     Geldkapital  und  Kreditverkehr  im  16ten 

Jahrhundert.     Jena.     1895. 
Gebhart,  E.     Les  origines  de  la  Renaissance  en  Italic.    Paris.     1879. 

Etudes  meridionales.     Paris.     1887. 

Geymiiller,  H.  Baron  von.     Gcschichte  der  Baukunst  der  Renaissance  in  Frankreich. 

2  vols.     Darmstadt.     1896-9. 
Gossart,  E.     Charles  Quint  et  Philippe  II.     ifctude  sur  les  origines  de  la  pr6pond6rance 

politique  de  I'Espagne  en  Europe.     M6moires  de  I'Acadfimie  Royale.     Brussels. 

1896. 

Notes  pour  servir  a  I'histoire  de  Charles  Quint.     Brussels.     1897. 

Gonse,  L.     La  Sculpture  Fran^aise  depuis  le  xiv«  siecle.     Paris.     1895. 

HiJfler,  C.  A.  C.  von.     Karls  I  Wahl  zum   Roraischen  Konig.     Sitzungsberichte  der 

Wiener  Academic.     1873. 
Kraus,  F.  X.     Geschichte  der  Christlichen  Kunst.     Vol.  n.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1897. 
La  Vita  Italiana  nel  seicento.     Conferenze  tenute  nel  1894.     Milan.     1895. 
Miintz,  E.     Histoire  de  I'Art  pendant  la  Renaissance.    Paris.     1888-    . 
Niel,  P.    J.  G.     Portraits  des  personnages  fran9ais  les  plus  illustres  du  xvie  sifecle. 

l^eproduits  1848-56  avec  notices.     2  vols.     Paris.     1848. 
Palustre,  L.     L'Architecture  de  la  Renaissance.     Paris.     1892. 
Rosier,  R.     Die  Kaiserswahl  Karls  V.     Vienna.     1868. 
Turba,  G.     Ueber  den  Zug  Kai.ser  Karls  V  gcgen  Algier.     Vienna.     1890. 

For  Medicean  Rome  .s^e  a7.so  Bih]io(jrnpliy  of  Chapters  X 11  and  XVII, 
for  Habsburg  aud  Valois  Bibliographies  of  Chapters  V-IX. 


CHAPTEE   lY 


LUTHER 

(I)  GERMAN  SOCIAL  LIFE  AND  POPULAR  AND  FAMILY  RELIGION  IN  THE 
LAST  DECADES  OF  THE  15th  AND  IN  THE  EARLIER  DECADES  OF 
THE    16th   centuries. 

(A)     Contemporary 

Barack,  K.  A.     Ziramerische  Chronik.     4  vols.     2nd  ed.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1881-2. 

Chroniken  der  deutschen  Stadte.     29  vols.    Leipzig.     In  progress. 

Gess,  F.     Die  Klostervisitationen  des  Herzogs  Georg  von  Sachsen,  nach  ungedruckten 

Quellen  dargestellt.     Leipzig.     1888. 
Grimm,  J.  Weistliumer.     7  vols.     (Vols,  v-vii,  edited  by  R.  Schroeder.)     Gottingen. 

1840-2,  1866,  1869,  1878. 
Hablei-,  K.     Das  Wallfahrtsbuch  des  Hei-mann  Kunig  von  Vach,  nnd  die  Pilgerreisen 

der  Deutschen  nach  Santiago  de  Compostella.     Drucke  und  Holzschnitte  des  15 

und  16  Jahrhunderts,  No.  1.     Strassburg.     1899. 
Hasak,  V.     Die  letzte  Rose  oder  Erklarung  des  Vaterunser  nach  Marcus  von  Weida 

(1501)  und  Mtinzinger  von  Ulm  (c.  1470).     Ratisbon.     1883. 
Hatzerlin,  Clara.     Liederbuch.     Edited  by  C.  Haltaus.     Quedliuburg.     1840. 
Liliencron,  R.  v.     Die  historischen  Volkslieder  der  Deutschen   vom   dreizehnten  bis 

zum  sechzehnten  Jahrhundert.     3  vols,  and  appendix.     Leipzig.     1865-9. 
Lorenzi,  Ph.  de.     Geilers  von  Keysersberg  ausgevvahlte  Schriften.     Trier.     1881. 
Munzenberger.  J.     Frankfurter  und  Magdeburger  Beichtbuchlein.     Mainz.     1883. 
Sachs,  Hans.     Fastnachtspiele.     Neudrucke  deutscher  Literaturwerke,  Nos.  26,  27,  31, 

32,  39,  40,  42,  43,  51,  52,  60,  63,  64.     Halle. 
Thausing,  M.     Diirers  Briefe,  Tagebiicher  und  Reime.    Vienna.     1872. 
Wackernagel,  Ph.     Das  deutsche  Kirchenlied  von  der  altesten  Zeit  bis  zum  Anfang  des 

17  Jahrhunderts.     Leipzig.     1865. 
Weller,  E.     Repertorium  typographicum.     Die  deutsche  Literatur  im  ersten  Viertel  des 

leten  Jahrhunderts  (with  two  supplements).     Nordlingen.     1864,  1874,  1885. 
Zarncke,  F.     Sebastian  Brants  Narrenschiff.     Leipzig.     1854. 

(B)     Secondary 

Binder,  F.     Charitas  Pirkheimer,  Aebtissin  von  St  Clara  zu  Nurnberg.     Fi'eiburg  i.  B. 

1893. 
Binz,  C.     Dr  Johann  Weyer,  der  erste  Bekampfer  des  Hexenwahns.     Bonn.     1885-8. 
Briick,  H.     Der  religiose  Unterricht  fiir  Jugend  und  Volk  in  Deutschland  in  der  zweiten 

Halfte  des  fiinfzehnten  Jahrhunderts.     Mainz.     1876. 
Cruel,  R.     Geschichto  der  deutschen  Predigt  im  Mittelaltov.     Detwold.     1879. 
Dacheux,  L.    Jean  Geiler  de  Keysersberg.     Paris  and  Strassburg.     1876. 
Eye,  A.  von.     Leben  und  Wirken  Albrecht  Diirers.     2nd  ed.     Nurnberg.     1868. 
Falk,  F.     Die  Druckkunst  im  Dienste  der  Kirche,  zunachst  in  Deutschland  bis  zum 

Jahre  1580.     Vereinschrift  der  Gorresgesellschaft.     Cologne.     1879. 
Die  deutsche  Messauslegungen  von  der  Mitte  des  15  Jahrhundei'ts  bis  zum  Jahre 

1525.     Vereinschrift  der  Gorresgesellschaft.     Cologne.     1889. 

728 


Bibliography  729 


Falk,  F.     Die  deutschen  Sterbebuchlein  von  der  altesten  Zeit  des  Buchdrucks  bis  zum 

Jahre  1520.     Vereinschrift  der  Giirresgesellschaft..     Cologne.     18!iO. 
Flathe,  L.     Geschichte  der  Vorlaufer  der  Kefonnatiou.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1835. 
Freytag,  G.     Bilder  aus  der  deutschen  Vergangenheit.     Vol.  ii,  ]'t  ii.     Aiis  dem  Jalir- 

liimdert   der  Reformation.     New  ed.     Leipzig,    1899.     (An   earlier   edition  was 

translated  by  Mrs  Malcolm.     London.     18G2.) 
Friedrich,  J.     Astrologie  und  Reformation,  oiler  die  Astrologen  als  Prediger  der  Refor- 
mation und  Urheber  des  Bauernkriegs.     Munich.     18G4. 
Gothein,  E.     rolitisclie  und  religiose  Volksbewegungen  vor  der  Reformation.     Breslau. 

1878. 
Hagen,   C.     Deutschlands  literarische   und   religiase   Verhiiltnisse   im    Reformations- 

zeitalter.     3  vols.     2nd  ed.     Frankfort.     1868. 
Hansen,  J.     Zauberwalin,  Inquisition  und  Hexenprozess  etc.     Ilistor.  Bibliothck  xii. 

Munich  and  Leipzig.     1900. 
Hasak,  V.     Der  christliche  Glaube  des  deutschen  Volkes  beim  Schluss  des  Mittelalters 

dargestellt  in  deutschen  Sprachdenkmiilern.     Ratisbon.     18fi8. 
Dr  M.  Luther  und  die  religiose  Literatur  seiner  Zeit  bis    zum    Jahre    1520. 

Ratisbon.     1881. 
Hofler,  C.  A.  C.  von.     Dcnkwiirdigkeiten  der  Charitas  Pirckheimcr.     Quelk-nsamml. 

z.  frank.  Gesch..  Vol.  iv.     1858. 
Kawerau,  G.     Caspar  Giittel.     Halle.     1882. 

Keller,  W.     Die  Reformation  und  die  aelteren  Reformationsparteicn.     Leipzig.     1885. 
Krebs,  J.     Zur  Geschichte  der  Heiligenthumsfahrten.     Cologne.     1881. 
Kriegk,  G.  L.     Deutsches  Biirgcrthum  im  Mittelalter.     Frankfort.     1868,  1871. 
Leitschuh,  F.     Albrecht  Diirer's  Tagebuch  der  Reise  in  die  Niederlande.     Leipzig. 

1884. 
Lichtenberg,  R.,  Freiherr  v.     Ueber  den  Humor  bei  den  deutschen  Kupfcrstechern  und 

Holzschnittkiinstlern  des  16  Jahrhunderts.     Strassburg.     1897. 
Lorenz,  J.     Volkserziehung  und  Volksunterricht  im  spiiteren  Mittelalter.     Paderborn 

and  Munster.     1887. 
Schuchardt,  Chr.     Lucas  Cranachs,  des  aelteren,  Leben  und  Werke.     2  vols.     Leipzig. 

1851-70. 
Schulz,  Alwin.     Deutsches  Leben  im  14tcn  und  15ten  Jahrhundert.     Prague,  Vienna. 

Leipzig.     1892. 
Schwaumkell,  Y..     Der  Cultus  der  heiligen  Anna  am  Ausgangc  des  Mittelalters.     Frei- 
burg.    1893. 
Scott,  W^  B.     Albert  Durer,  his  Life  and  Works.     London.     1869. 
Uhlhorn,  G.     Die  christliche  Liebesthatigkeit  im  Mittelalter.     Stuttgart.     1887.     Cf. 

Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengeschichte,  iv,  pp.  44  ff. 
Ullmann,  C.     Reformatoren  vor  der  Reformation.     2nd  ed.     2   vols.     Gotha.     1866. 

Transl.  by  R.  Menzies.     2  vols.     Edinburgh.     1855. 
Walther,  W.     Die  deutsche  Bibeliibersetznng  des  Mittelalters.     Brunswick.     1889. 
Wilken,  E.     Geschichte  der  geistlichen  Spiele  in  Deutschland.     Gottingeu.     1872. 
Zur  Geschichte  des  Klerus.     AUgemeine  Zeitung.     Oct.  28,  1873. 


(II)     MYSTICISM   AND   HUMANISM    IN    THEIR    RELATION   TO    LUTHEK 

(A)       CONTK.MPOKAUV 

Becker,  D.  J.     Chronica  eines  fahrenden  Schiilers  oder  VVanderbUchlein  des  .Johannes 

Butzbach.  Ratisbon.  1869. 
Becking,  E.     Ulrici  Ilutteni  Opera.     5  vols.     Leipzig.     1871.     A  supplement  contains, 

Epistolae  obscurorum  virorum  cum  notis  illustrantibus  advcrsariisquc  scriptis. 

2  vols.  Leipzig.  1864,  1869. 
Boos,  H.     Thomas  und  Felix  Platter.     Leipzig.     1876. 


730  Luther 


Gillert,  K.     Der  Briefwechsel  des  Konrad  Mutianus.     Halle.     1890. 

Muther,  T.     Die  Wittenberger  Universitats-  und  Facultatsstatuten  vom  Jahre  1508. 

Halle.     1867. 
Theologia  deutscli.     Critical  edition  by  Fr.  Pfeiffer.     4th  ed.     GUtersloh.     1900. 


(B)     Secondary 

Delprat,  C.  H.     Verhandeling  over  de  Broederschap  van  Gerard  Groote.    Arnhem. 

1856. 
Druramond,  K.  B.     Erasmus.     2  vols.     London.     1873. 

Geiger,  L.     Kenaissance  und  Humanismus  in  Italien  und  Deutschland.     Berlin.     1882. 
Grube,  K.     Gerard  Groot  und  seine  Stiftungen.     Vereinschrift  der  Gorresgesellschait. 

Cologne.     1883. 
Hering,    H.      Die   Mystik  Luthers   im   Zusaminenhange   seiner  Theologie.     Leipzig. 

1879. 
Kiimmel,  H.  K.     Geschichte  des  deutschen  Schulwesens  im  Uebergange  vom  Mittelalter 

zur  Neuzeit.     Leipzig.     1892. 
Kampschulte,  F.  W.     Die  Universitat  Erfurt  in  ihrem  Verhaltniss  zu  dem  Humanis- 
mus und  der  Reformation.     Aus  den  Quellen  dargestellt.     2  vols.     Trier.     1856, 

1860. 
Krause,  C.     Helius  Eobanus  Hessus,  sein  Leben  und  seine  Werke.     2  vols.     Gotha. 

1879. 
Muther,  T.     Aus  dem  Universitats-  und  Gelehrtenleben  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation. 

Erlangen.     1866. 
Nichols,  F.  M.     The  Epistles  of  Erasmus  from  his  earliest  letters  to  his  fifty-first  year 

arranged  in  order  of  time.     London.     1901. 
Preger,  W.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Mystik  im  Mittelalter.     3  vols,   (unfinished). 

"  Leipzig.     1874,  1881,  1893. 
Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  der  religiosen  Bewegung  in  den  Niederlanden  in  der 

2ten  HJilfte  des  14ten  Jahrhunderts.     Munich.     1894. 
Prbhle,  H.  A.     Andreas  Proles,  Vicarius  der  Augustiner,  ein  Zeuge  der  Wahrheit  kurz 

vor  Luther.     Gotha.     1857. 
Reindell,  W.     Luther,  Crotus,  and  Hutten.     Marburg.     1890. 
Riederer,  J.  B.     Nachrichten  zur  Kirchen-  Gelehrten-  und  Biichergeschichte.     4  vols. 

Altdorf.     1764-8. 
Roth,  F.     Willibald  Pirkheimer.     Halle.     1887. 
Schwarz,  B.     Jakob  Wimpheling,  der  Altmeister  des  deutschen  Schulwesens.     Gotha. 

1875. 
Schvi'ertzell,  G.     Helius  Eobanus  Hessus.     Halle.     1874. 
Strauss,  D.  F.     Ulrich  von  Hutten.     2  vols.     2nd  ed.     Leipzig.     1874.     Translated  and 

slightly  abridged  by  Mrs  George  Stui-ge.     London.     1874. 
Wiskowatofl",  P.  v.     Jacob  Wimpheling,     Berlin.     1867. 


(Ill)     LIVES    OF   LUTHER   AND   ORIGINAL    SOURCES    FOR    INCIDENTS    IN 
HIS   CAREER 

(A)   CONTKMPORARY 

Cochlaeus,  J.     Commentarius  de  actis  et  scriptis  M.  Lutheri .  .  .  ab  anno  1517  usque  ad 

annum  1537.     St  Victor  prope  Moguntiam.     1549. 
Cruciger,  Caspar.     Tabulae  chronologicae  actorum  M.  Lutheri.     Wittenberg.     1553. 


Bibliography  731 


Faber,  K.      Dr  M.  Luthers  Briefe  an  AUbrecht,  Herzog  In  Prcussen.      Konigsberg. 

1811. 
Furstemanu,  C.  E.     Neues  Urknndenbnch  ziir  Geschichte  der  evaiigclischen  Kirchen- 

reformatioa.     Vol.  i  (all  published).     Hamburg.     1842. 
Kolde,  Th.     Analecta  Lutherana.     Gotha.     1883. 
Leib,  Killian.     Annales  von  150;$-15-23.     (Vols,  vii  and  ix  of  von  Arctin's  Beitrlige  zur 

Geschichte  und  Literatur.)     Munich.     1803-0. 
Loesche,  G.     Analecta  Lutherana  et  Melanchtlioniana.     Tiscluedeu  Lutliers  und  Aus- 

spriiche  Melanchthons.     Gotha.     1892. 
Loscher,  V.  E.    Vollstiindige  Keforniations-Acta  und  Docnmenta.     3  vols.     Leipzig. 

1720-9. 
Luther,  Martin.     Werke.     Kritische  Gesanimtausgabe.     Weimar.     1883  etc.     (Twenty 

volumes  have  been  published.) 
Mathesius,  J.     Historien  von  .  .  .  Martini  Lutheri  An  fang,  Lere,  Leben,  und  Stcrben. 

Nurnberg.     1570.     Critical  edition  by  G.  Loesche.     Prague.     1896. 
Melanchtlion,  P.     Ilistoria  de   vita  et  actis   Lutheri.      Wittenberg.      1545.      (To   be 

found  in  Vol.  vi  of  the  Corpus  Reformatoi-um.) 
Myconius,  Fr.     Historia  Ileforraationis,  1517-42.     Editetl  by  E.  S.  Cyprian.     Leipzig. 

1718. 
Katzeberger,  M.      MS.  Geschichte  iiber  Luther  und  seine  Zeit.      Edited   by  Ch.    G. 

Neudecker.    Jena.     1850. 
Seidemann,   J.   K.     A  Lauterbach's  Tagebuch  .  .   .  die  llauptquelle   der  Tischreden 

Lnthers.     Dresden.     1872. 
Selueccer,  N.     Historia  .  .  .  D.  M.  Lutheri.     Leipzig.     1575. 
Wrampelmeyer,    H.      Tagebuch   iil)er  Dr    Martin    Luther,   gefuhrt   von   Dr  Conrad 


Cordatus  (1537).     Halle.     188i: 


(B)     Second  Alt  V 

Berger,  A.  E.     Martin  Luther  in  kulturgeschichtlicher  Darstellung.     2  vols.     Berlin. 

1895. 
Enders,  L.      Dr  Martin  Luthers  Briefwechsel.      5  vols.      Frankfort  and  Stuttgart. 

1884-93. 
Kolde,  Th.     Martin  Luther.     Eine  Biographic.     2  vols.     Gotha.     1884,  1893. 
Kiistlin,  J.     Martin  Luther,  sein  Leben  und  seine  Schriften.     2  vols.     1875. 
Lang,  H.     Martin  Lutlier.     Ein  religioses  Charakterbild.     Berlin.     1870. 
Lenz,  M.     Martin  Luther.     Festschrift  zum  10.  Nov.  1883.     Berlin.     1883. 
Lindsay,  T.  M.     Luther  and  the  German  Koformation.     Edinburgli.     1900. 
Seckendorf,  V.  L.     Commcntarius  .   .   .  de  Lutheranisrao.     Frankfort.     1692. 
Seidemann,  J.  K.     Erlauterungen  zur  Reformationsgeschichte.     Dresden.     1872. 
Treitschke,    H.    von.      Luther  und    die  deutsche  Nation.      Preussische  JahrbUcher. 

November.     1883. 


(IV)     LUTHER'S    LIFE    UP    TO    THE    BEGINNING    OF    THE 
INDULGENCE   CONTROVERSY 

(A)       COXTK.MPOKAUV 

Constitutiones  Fratrum  Heremitarum  Sancti  Angustini.     NHrn berg.     1504. 
Kessler,  J.     Sabbata.      Chronik  der  Jahre   1523-1539.     Edited  by  Egli   and  Schoch. 
St  Gallen.     1902. 


732  Luther 


(B)     Secondary 

Buchwald,  G.      Zur  Wittemberg  Stadt-  uucl  Universitatsgeschichte  in  der  Keforma- 

tiouszeit.     Leipzig.     1893. 
Elze,  Th.    Luthers  Reise  nach  Rom.     Berlin.     1899. 
Hausrath,  A.    M.  Lutliers  Romfahrt,  nach  eiuem  gleichzeitigen  Pilgerbuche.     Berlin. 

1894. 
Jiirgens,  C.     Luther  von  seiner  Geburt  bis  zum  Ablassstreit.     3  vols.     Leipzig.     1846, 

1847. 
Keller,  L.     Johann  von  Staupitz.    Leipzig.     1883. 
Kohler,  K.  F.     Luthers  Reisen  und  ihre  Bedeutung  fiir  das  Werk  der  Reformation. 

Eisenach.     1873. 
Kolde,    Th.      Die    deutschen    Augustiner-Congregationen    und    Johann  v.    Staupitz. 

Gotha.     1879. 
Friedrich  der  Weise   und  die   Anfange  der   Reformation  mit    archivalischen 

Beilagen.     Erlangen.     1881. 
Kbstlin,  J.     Geschichtliche  Untersuchungen  iiber  Luthers  Leben  vor  dem  Ablassstreit. 

Theologische  Studien  und  Ki'itiken  for  1871,  pp.  7-54.     Gotha.     1871. 
Krumhaar,  K.     Die  Grafschaft  Mansfeld  im  Reformationszeitalter.    Eislebeu.     1845. 
Oergel,  G.     Vom  jungen  Luther.     Erfurt.     1899. 
Paulus,  N.     Der  Augustiner  Bartholomaeus  Arnold  von  Usingen,  Luthers  Lehrer  und 

Gegner.      In  Strassbui'ger  theologische  Studien,  Vol.  i.  Ft  iii.      Strassburg  and 

Freiburg.     1893. 
Richard,  A.  V.     Licht  und  Schatten.     Ein  Beitrag  zur  Culturgeschichte  von  Sachsen 

und  Thuringen  im  xvi  Jahrhundert.     Leipzig.     1861. 


(V)     THE   INDULGENCE    CONTROVERSY 
(A)     Contemporary 

Kapp,  J.  E.  Sammlung  einiger  zum  papstlichen  Ablass,  iiberhaupt  .  .  .  aber  zu  der  .  .  . 
zwischen  D.  Martin  Luther  und  Johann  Tetzel  hiervongefuhrten  Streitigkeit,  ge- 
horigen  Schriften,  rait  Eiuleitungen  und  Anmerkungen  versehen.    Leipzig.     1721. 

Kleine  Nachlese  einiger  .  .  .  zur  Erlauterung  der  Reformationsgeschichte  niitz- 

licher  Urkunden.     (Four  parts.)     Leipzig.     1727-33. 

Mirabilia  Romae.    Niirnberg.    1491.     (A  critical  edition  by  G.  Parthey.    Berlin.    1869.) 

(B)     Secondary 

Beringer,  F.  (Soc.  Jes.).      Der  Ablass,  sein  Wesen  und  Gebrauch.      12th  ed.     Pader- 

born,  1898. 
Bouvier,  J.  B.     Treatise  on  Indulgences  (translated  by  F.  Oakley).     London.     1848. 
Bratke,  E.     Luthers  95  Theses  und  ihre  dograenhistorischen  Voraussetzungen.     Got- 

tingen.     1884. 
Brieger,  Th.     Das  Wesen  des  Ablasses  am  Ausgange  des  Mittelalters,  untersucht  mit 

Riicksicht  auf  Luthers  Theses.     Leipzig.     1897. 
Dieckhoff,  A.  W.     Der  Ablassstreit  dogmengeschichtlich  dargestellt.     Gotha.     1886. 
Grone,  V.     Tetzel  und  Luther.     2nd  ed.     Soest.     1860. 

Kohler,  W.     Dokumente  zum  Ablassstreit  von  1517.     Tiibingen  and  Leipzig.     1902. 
Korner,  F.     Tezel  der  Ablassprediger.     Mit  bes.  Riicksicht  auf  kathol.  Anschauungen. 

Frankenberg.     1880. 
Lea,  II.  C.     A  History  of  Auricular  Confession  and  Indulgences  in  the  Latin  Church. 

3  vols.     Philadelphia.     1896. 
May,  J.     Der  Kurfurst  Cardinal  und  Erzbischof  Albrecht  II  von  Mainz  und  Magdeburg 

und  seine  Zeit.     2  vols.    Miinchen.     1865,  1875. 


Bihlio(jraph(j  733 


(VI)  FROM  THE  INDULGENCE  CONTROVERSY  TO  THE  DIET 
OF  WORMS 

(A)       COXTKMPOIJARY 

Balan,  P.     Monumenta  Reformationis  Lutherauae  ex  tabulis  S.  Seclis  secrctis  1521-5 

Ratisbou.     1883-4. 
Brewer,  J.  S.     Letters  and  Papers,  foreign  and  domestic,  of  the  reign  of  Henry  VIIL 

Vol.  ni.     London,  1870. 
Brieger,  T.     Aleander  und  Luther,  1521.     Die  vervoUstandigten  Aleander-Depeschen 

nebst  Untersuchungen  iiber  den  Worraser  Reichstag.     Pt  i.     Gotha.     1894. 
Kalkoli;  P.     Die  Depeschen  des  Nuntius  Aleander.     2nd  ed.     Halle.     1897. 
Laemmer.  H.     Monumenta  Vaticana  historiara  ecclesiasticara  saeculi  xvi  illustrantia. 

Freiburg.     1861. 

Meletematum  Roraanorum  Mantissa.     Regensburg.     1875. 

Murner,  T.     An  den  grossmachtigsten  und  durchlauchtigsten  Adel   deutscher  Nation 

(1520),  edited  by  Ernst  Voss.     (No.  153  of  Neudrucke  deutscher  Literaturwerke 

des  XVI  und  XVII  Jahrhunderts.)     Halle.     1899. 
Wace  and  Buchheim.     Luther's  Primary  Works.     2nd  ed.     London.     1896. 

(B)     Secondary 

Albert,    R.     Aus  welchen  Griinden  disputirte  Johann  Eck  gegen   Luther  in  Leipzig 

1519?    Zeitschrift  fiir  die  historische  Theologie.     xliii,  pp.  332-441.    Gotha.    1873. 
Baur,  A.     Deutschland  in  den  Jahreu   1517-1525  getrachtet  im  Lichte  gleichzeitiger 

anonymer  und  psendonymer  deutschen  Volks-  und  Flugschriften.     Ulm.     1872. 
Beard,  C.     Martin  Luther  and  the  Reformation  in  Germany  until  the  close  of  the  Diet 

of  Worms.     London.     1889. 
Bezold,  F.  V.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Reformation.     Berlin.     1890. 
Creighton,  M.  (Bishop).     A  History  of  the  Papacy.    Vol.  vi.    2nd  ed.    London.     1897. 
Diillinger,  J.    J.     Die   Reformation,    ihre   innere  Entwickclung.     3  vols.     Ratisbon. 

18^(5-8. 
Friedrich,  J.    Der  Reichstag  zu  Worms,  1321.    Nach  den  Briefen  Aleanders.     Munich. 

1871. 
Gebhardt,  B.     Die  Gravamina  der  deutschen  Nation.     2nd  ed.     Breslau.     1895. 
Hausrath,  A.     Aleander  und  Luther  auf  dem  Reichstage  zu  Worms.     Berlin.     1897. 
Jacoby,  H.    Die  Liturgik  der  Reformatoren.    Vol.  i.    Introduction  —  Liturgik  Luthers. 

Gotha.     1871. 
Janssen,   J.     Geschichte   des   deutschen   Volkes   seit  dem  Ausgang  des  Mittelalters. 

Vol.  II.     18th  ed.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1897. 
Kolde.  T.     Luther  und   der  Reichstag   zu  Worms  1521.     Schriften  des  Vereins  fUr 

Reformationsgeschichte.     No.  1.     Halle.     1883. 
Kuczynski,  A.     Thesaurus  libellorum   historiam   Reformatorum  illustrantium   (Ver- 

zelchniss   einer   Sammlung  von   nahezu   3000   Flugschriften   Luthers   und  seiner 

Zeitgenossen).     Leipzig.     1870. 
Maurenbrecher,  W.     Studien  und  Skizzen  zur  Geschichte  der  Reformationszeit.     Leip- 
zig.    1874. 
Ranke,  L.  v.    Deutsche  Geschichte  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.    Vols,  n,  iii.    Gth  ed. 

Leipzig.     1881,  1882. 
Seidemann,  J.  K.     Die  Leipziger  Disputation  im  .Tahre  1519.     Dresden.     1843. 
Schade,  O.      Satiren  und   Pasquille  aus  der   Reformationszeit.      3   vols.      Hanover. 

1850-8. 
Thomas,  G.  M.     Martin  Luther  und  die  Reformationsbewegung  in  Deutschland  1520- 

1525.     In  Auszugen  aus  Marino  Sanuto's  Diarien.     Ansbach.     1883. 
Ulmann,  H.     Franz  von  Sickingon.     Leipzig.     1872. 
Wiedemann,  T.     Johann  Eck.     Katisi)OH.     18G5. 

See  also  Bihliixjrnphii  of  Chapters  V-  VI IF. 


CHAPTEKS   Y-VIII 

GERMANY,   1521-1555 

I.     MANUSCRIPTS 

The  materials  for  the  history  of  Germany  during  the  Reformation  are  probably 
more  extensive,  more  scattered,  and  more  difhcult  of  description  in  brief  than  those 
for  the  history  of  any  other  country  in  Europe ;  for  whereas  other  States  had  as  a  rule 
one  central  government,  one  chancery,  and  one  foreign  office,  Germany  had  many. 
There  are  not  only  the  imperial  archives,  the  domestic  and  foreign  correspondence  of 
Charles  V  and  of  the  German  Heich,  but  every  important  Prince  had  his  own  domestic 
correspondence  and  his  correspondence  with  other  German  Princes  as  well  as  with 
foreign  Powers ;  and  thus  there  is  no  one  repository  of  materials  for  German  history 
as  in  London,  Paris,  or  Simancas.  Even  the  correspondence  of  Charles  V  is  divided 
between  Vienna,  Brussels,  and  Simancas,  while  the  despatches  of  foreign  representa- 
tives at  Charles  V's  Court  and  at  the  Imperial  Diets  must  be  sought  principally  in 
Rome,  Paris,  Venice,  and  London. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  Emperor's  correspondence  are  the  records  of  the  Diets, 
of  which  the  most  complete  series  is  that  preserved  at  Frankfort  (cf.  Jung,  R.,  Das 
historische  Archiv  der  Stadt  Frankfurt  am  Main,  Frankfort,  1896,  pp.  50,  51).  These 
relate  mainly  to  the  internal  affiiirs  of  the  Empire;  but  the  archives  of  the  Electors 
and  of  other  Princes  such  as  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse  and  the  Dukes  of  Bavaria  are 
important  for  foreign  as  well  as  for  domestic  history.  Of  these  archives  the  chief 
are  those  of  Austria  at  Vienna  and  Innsbruck,  Ernestine  Saxony  at  Weimar,  Albertine 
Saxony  at  Dresden,  Hesse  at  Marburg,  Brandenburg  at  Berlin,  the  Palatinate  at 
Heidelberg,  Bavaria  at  Munich,  Cleves  at  Diisseldorf,  Brunswick  at  Wolfenbiittel, 
and  of  the  spiritual  electors  of  Mainz,  Cologne,  and  Trier  at  their  respective  metro- 
politan cities. 

Scarcely  inferior  in  interest  are  the  archives  of  some  of  the  imperial  cities.  The 
'  Stadtarchiv'  sometimes  contains  not  merely  bulky  materials  for  municipal  and  local 
history,  but  clu-onicles  relating  the  political  and  religious  events  of  the  day,  and 
occasionally  political  correspondence  of  substantial  value  (cf.  Jung  ut  supra;  the 
mere  list  of  classes  of  documents  at  Frankfort  occupies  a  hundred  folio  pages).  The 
political  correspondence  of  Strassburg,  for  instance,  is  of  the  highest  importance; 
while  the  records  of  smaller  cities  often  become  of  prime  value  for  events  of  more 
than  local  importance.  Those  of  Miihlhausen  throw  much  light  on  the  history  of  the 
Peasants'  War  in  Thuringia,  those  of  Mtinster  are  the  principal  source  for  our  know- 
ledge of  the  Anabaptist  rising,  and  those  of  Lubeck  for  the  'Grafenfehde,'  while  it  was 
on  the  records  of  Ulra  that  Ranke  based  his  account  of  Charles  V's  negotiations  in  the 
winter  of  1546-7.  An  indication  of  the  contents  of  these  national  and  local  archives 
is  given  in  C.  A.  H.  Burkhardt's  admirable  Hand-  und  Adressbuch  der  deutschen 
Archive  (2  pts,  Leipzig,  1887). 

734 


Bihliography  785 


The  publication  of  these  vast  masses  of  material  is  being  energetically  pursued 
by  State-governments,  universities,  voluntary  associations,  and  individual  scholars. 
There  are  royal  and  ducal  historical  commissions  like  that  of  Saxony  and  that  of 
Baden  ;  directions  of  State  archives  such  as  the  Prussian;  university  bodies,  the  most 
active  of  which,  the  Bavarian  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften,  has  published  or  is  pub- 
lishing the  AUgenieine  deutsclie  Biograpliie,  the  Jahrbucher  der  dculschen  Geschichtc, 
the  Reichstagsakten,  the  Briele  und  Akten  zur  Geschichte  des  xvi  Jahrhunderts,  the 
Chroniken  derdeutschen  Stiidte,  the  Forschungen  zurdeutschen  (Jeschicl\le  and  annual 
•  Sitzungsberichte';  voluntary  associations  of  a  theologico-historical  character,  such 
as  the  Giirresgesellschaft  zur  Pllege  der  Wissenschaft  im  katholischen  Dcutschland, 
and  the  Verein  fiir  Reformationsgeschichte,  or  with  a  local  purpose  like  the  Verein  fUr 
Oberhessische  Geschichte,  or  the  Historische  Verein  fiir  Niedersachsen.  Nearly  every 
State,  and  many  districts  and  cities,  have  associations  for  the  publication  of  their 
records.  There  are  some  two  hundred  periodical  publications  in  Germany  devoted  to 
historical  research  ;  and  practically  every  historical  dissertation  for  a  doctorate  in  Ger- 
man universities  is  based  upon  the  study  of  some  portion  of  unpublished  material. 
The  fullest  guide  to  these  current  works  is  the  annual  biljliography  appearing  in  the 
Historische  Vierteljahrsschrift  (ed.  G.  Seellger,  Leipzig).  Elaborate  surveys  of  the 
historical  output  for  each  year  are  contained  in  Berner's  Jahresberichte  der  Geschichts- 
wissenschaften  (Berlin,  xxv  Bde,  1878-1902)  ;  concise  ones  in  the  Mitteilungen  a.  d. 
histor.  Litteratur  (edited  for  the  Ilistor.  Gesellsch.  in  Berlin  liy  I)r  F.  llirsch) ;  while 
the  more  important  articles  in  German  periodicals  are  generally  noticed  in  the  Histo- 
rische Zeitschrift  and  the  English  Historical  Review.  A  slight  l)ut  useful  index  is 
supplied  by  F.  Forster's  Kritischer  Wegweiser  durch  die  neuere  deutsclie  historische 
Literatur,  Berlin,  1900.  The  best  general  bibliography  is  Dahlmann-Waitz,  Qnellen- 
kunde  der  deutschen  Geschichte,  6th  ed.  by  E.  Steindorfl",  1894.  There  are  also  separate 
bibliographies  of  the  history  of  many  of  the  chief  German  states. 


II.     PRINTED   AUTHORITIES   FOR   THE    WHOLE   PERIOD    1521-1555 

A.     Documents 

(i)     Relating  to  general  history 

Alb^ri,  E.     Le  Relazioni  dcgli  Ambasciatori  Veneti  al  Senato  durante  il  secolo  deci- 

mosesto.     15  vols.     Florence.     1839-62.     3rd  Ser. 
Bradford,  W.     Correspondence  of  Charles  V.     London.     1850. 
DoUinger,  J.  J.  L     Documente  zur  Geschichte  Karls  V.     In  Beitriige  zur  politischeu, 

kirchlichen  und  Cultur-Gesch.  des  xvi  Jahr.     Vol.  1.     Ratisbon.     1862. 
Fiedler,  J.     Relationen  Venetianischer  Botschafter  uber  Deutschland  und  Oesterreich 

im  16  Jahrh.     Fontes  Rerum  Austriacarum.     Vol.  xxx.     Vienna.     1870. 
Forstemann,  C.  G.     Neues  Urkundenbuch  zur  Geschichte  der  evangelisciien  Kirchen- 

reformation.     Hamburs.     1842.  ^^    ,      ^r     -n  i        iokc 

Gachard,  L.  P.    Relations  des  ambassadeurs  ven^tiens  sur  Charles  V.    Brussels.     -1856 
Goldast,  Melchior.     Collectio  Constitutionum  Imperialium.     Frankfort.     Vols,  i  and 

Harpprecht,  G.  N.  von.    Staatsarchiv  des  kayserlichen  Kammergerichts.    5  pts.    Frank- 
fort.    1757-69.     Ulm.     1785-9. 
Kliipfel,  K.    Urkunden  zur  Geschichte  des  schwabischen  Bundes  1488-li>33.    Stuttgart. 

Koch,  C.  G.     Neue  und  voUstandige  Saninilung  der  Reichsabschiede.     4  pts.     Frank- 
fort.    1747. 


736  Germany,  1521-55 

Krafl't,  Carl.     Briefe  und  Dokumente  ans  Zeit  der  Roformation  im  16  Jahrh.     Elber- 

feld.     1876. 
Laemraer,  H.     Monnmenta  Vaticana.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1861. 

Analecta  Romana.     Schaffhaiiseu.     1864. 

Lanz,  K.     Correspondenz  des  Kaisers  Karl  V.     3  vols.     Leipzig.     1844-6. 

Aktenstiicke  und  Briefe  zur  Gesch.   Karls  V.      Mon.   Habsb.     Pt  i.     Vienna. 

1854. 

Staatspapiere  zur  Geschichte  Karls  V.     Stuttgart.     1845. 

Le  Glay,  E.  Negotiations  diplomatiques  entre  France  et  I'Autriche.  Coll.  de  Docu- 
ments Inedits.     Paris.     2  vols.     1845. 

Lenz,  M.     Briefweclisel  Philipps  von  Hessen  mit  Butzer.     Leipzig.    3  vols.     1880-91. 

Letters  and  Papers,  Foreign  and  Domestic,  of  the  Reign  of  Henry  VIII.  Vols,  in  and 
IV,  ed.  J.  S.  Brewer.  Vols,  v-xix,  ed.  J.  Gairdner.  1519-44.  London.  1860- 
1903. 

Loscher,  V.  E.  VoUstandige  Reformations-acta  und  Documenta.  3  vols.  Leipzig. 
1720-8. 

Liinig,  J.  C.     Das  deutsche  Reichsarchiv.     24  vols.     Leipzig.     1713-22. 

Monumenta  Habsburgica.  1473-1576.  2  vols.  Kaiserl.  Akad.  der  Wissensch.  Vienna. 
1853-7. 

Neudecker,  Chr.  G.  Merkwiirdige  Aktenstiicke  aus  dem  Zeitalter  der  Reformation. 
2  Abth.     Nurnberg.     1838. 

Urkunden  aus  der  Reformationszeit.     Cassel.     1836. 

Raunier,  F.  L.  G.  von.     Briefe  aus  Paris  zur  Erlauterung  der  Gesch.  des  16  und  17 

Jahrh.     2  parts.     Leipzig.     1831. 
Reiclistagsakteu  unter  Karl  V  hei'ausgegeben  durch  die  Miinchener  historische  Kom- 

mission.     Vol.  i,  ed.  A.  Kluckhohn.     1893.     Vols,  ii-in,  ed.  A.  Wrede.     Gotha. 

1896,  1901. 
Spanisli   State    Papers,    Calendar  of.     Ed.    Bergenroth.     Vols.    i-n.     Ed.    Gayangos. 

Vols,  iii-vii.     London.     1862-1899. 
State  Papers  published  by  the  Record   Commission.     11    vols.     London.     1830-1852. 
Turba,  G.     Venetianische  Depeschen  vom  Kaiserhofe.     Dispacci  di  Germania.     Vols. 

i-ii.     Hist.  Komm.  d.  k.  Akad.  d.  Wissens.     Vienna.     1889,  1892. 
Venetian  State  Papers,  Calendar  of.     Ed.    Rawdon  Brown.     Vols,    in-vi.     London. 

1864-1884. 


(ii)     The  religious  leaders  and  their  writings 
(a)     Luther  and  the  Lutherans 

The  published  volumes  of  the  correspondence  and  works  of  Luther  and  his  col- 
leagues are  far  too  numerous  to  be  set  out  in  detail.  None  of  the  various  editions  of 
Luther's  works  is  completely  satisfactory,  the  best  being  the  Erlangen  edition  1826- 
1879;  an  excellent  edition  by  F.  Knaake  and  others  is  however  in  course  of  publication 
(Weimar,  1883  sqq.  20  vols.).  See  also  Burkhardt,  Luthers  Briefwechsel,  1866;  Kolde, 
Analecta  Lutherana,  1883;  the  Letters,  ed.  de  Wette  and  Seidemann,  6  vols.,  1825-58; 
Forstemann  and  Biudseil's  editions  of  the  Table-talk  (Tischreden,  4  vols.,  1844-8,  and 
in  Latin,  3  vols.,  18G3).  The  great  'Corpus  Ref orraatorum  '  (cd.  C.  G.  Bretschneidcr 
and  H.  E.  Bindseil,  Halle,  1834-1900,  89  vols.)  consists  chiefly  of  the  works  of  Melanch- 
thon  and  Calvin.  See  also  Bugenhagen's  Briefwechsel,  ed.  Vogt,  Stettin,  1888;  A. 
L.  Herminjard's  Correspondances  des  Reformateurs  dans  les  Pays  de  la  langue  f ran^aise 
(10  vols.,  Geneva,  1866  etc.)  ;  and  the  works  of  Justus  Jonas  (ed.  Kawerau,  Halle, 
1884-5),  Sebastian  Lotzer  (ed.  A.  Goetze,  Leipzig,  1002),  Friedrich  Myconius,  John 
and  Stephen   Agricola,  Ambrose  Blaurer,   John   Brenz,    Wolfgang  Capito,    Carldstadt, 


Bihlio(jraphy  737 


A.  Corvinus,  Andreas  Osiander,  J.  Honterus  (Vienna,  1898),  Urbanus  Rhcgius,  and 
Schnepf .  (Cf .  Hagenbach's  Leben  und  ausgcwiihlte  Schriften  der  Viiter  der  reforrairlcu 
Kirche,  10  pts,  Elberfeld,  1857-G2.) 


{See  also  Bihliocjraphy  of  Chap.  IV.) 


(b)     The  Humanists 

The  writings  of  Erasmus  continue  to  be  of  value  until  his  death  in  153G ;  there  is  no 
satisfactory  edition  of  liis  worlcs,  that  of  Le  Clerc  (Leydcn,  10  vols.,  1703-G)  being  the 
one  generally  used  (cf.  bibliogr.  note  in  Emerton's  Erasmus,  189'.),  pp.  xxiii-vi).  See 
also  Beatus  Rhenanus,  Brief vvechsel,  ed.  Horawitz  and  Hartfelder  (Leipzig,  188G;  cf. 
A.  Horawitz,  Des  Beatus  Khenanus  literarische  Thiitigkeit  1530-47,  Leipzig,  1873;  and 
id.,  Die  Bibliothelc  und  Correspondenz  des  Beatus  Khenanus,  Vienna,  1874);  Ulrich 
Zasius,  Epistolae,  ed.  Riegger,  Ulm,  1774  (cf.  R.  Stintzing,  Ulricli  Zasius,  Basel,  1857). 
For  other  Humanists  consult :  Fr.  Roth,  Willilmld  Pirkheimer,  Halle,  1887;  C.  Kranse, 
Helius  Eobanus  Hessus,  2  vols.,  Gotha,  1879;  and  Burkhardt-Bieilermann,  T.,  Uoiiifa- 
cius  Amerbach  und  die  Reformation,  Basel,  1894;  J.  von  Aschbach.  Die  Wiener 
Universitiit  und  ihre  Humanisten,  Vienna,  1877 ;  K.  Hartfelder  and  F.  von  Bezuld  on 
Kourad  Celtes,  Historische  Zeitschrift  for  1882  and  1883;  A.  Horawitz,  Caspar 
Bruschius,  Leipzig,  1875. 

(c)     The  Catholics 

Of  the  works  by  Catholic  writers  of  the  time  the  most  important  are  those  of 
Cochlaeus,  Thomas  Murner,  Johann  Eck,  Emser,  Karl  von  Miltitz,  Alexander  Hcgius, 
J.  A.  Faber,  Gropper,  I'flug,  and  Johann  Dietenberger  (cf.  W.  Fricdensburg,  Beitriige 
zur  Briefwechsel  der  katholischen  golehrten  Deutschlands  im  Reformationszeitalter, 
in  Zeitschr.  fur  Kirchengeschichte  1897-1902). 


(d)     The  Zwinglians 

Zwingli's  w^orks  are  noticed  in  the  bibliograpliy  to  Chap.  X.  The  works  of  his 
successor,  Heiurich  Bullinger,  and  of  Oecolampadius,  Caspar  Hedio,  Theodore  Blbli- 
ander,  Leo  Jud,  Oswald  Myconius,  Joachim  von  Watt  (Vadianus),  should  also  be 
consulted. 

B.      CONTEMPOR.VRY   CHRONICLES,    CORRESPONDENCES,    HISTORIES,    AND    MEMOIRS 

Bullinger,  Heinrich.  Reformationsgeschichte.  Edd.  Hottinger  and  Vogeli.  Frauen- 
feld.     6  vols.      1838-40.  ,         ,^^^       _.    ^ 

Charles  V.  Commentaries.  Ed.  Kervyn  de  Lettenhove.  Brussels.  18C2.  (Cf.  O. 
Waltz,  Die  Denkwurdigkeiten  Kaiser  Karls  V.     Bonn.     1901.) 

Cochlaeus  [vere  Dobncck],  Johann.  Comment,  de  scriptis  et  actis  Lutheri.  151,-lo4G. 
Mainz.     1549.     Republ.  as  '  Historia.'     Paris.     15G5. 

Cruciger,  Caspar.     Tabulae  chronologicae  actorum  M.  Lutheri.     Wittenberg.     \boS. 

Fabricius,  Ilenricus.     Kurtze  Chronick  1500-1508.     Ed.  L.  Surius.     Cologne.     Io08. 

Flugschriften  aus  der  Reformationszeit.     19  parts.     Halle.     189a-1902. 

Frauck,  Sebastian.  Chronica.  3  parts.  Strassburg.  1531.  (Later  editions  with 
additions,  lo3G,  1555,  1585;  cf.  C.  A.  Hase,  Sebastian  Franck  «>^-;  •'^,^'"- ;"•"?, ^,*;f^' 
Leipzi'T  18G9  ;  H.  Bischof,  Seb.  Franck  und  dentsche  Geschichtschreibung, 
1857;  and  H.  Oucken,  Sebastian  Franck  als  Historiker  in  Hl.st.  Zeitschr.  i-xxxii, 
385-435.) 

47 


'38  Germany,  1521-55 


rrelier,  Marqnard.     Germanicarum  rerum  scriptores.     3  vols.     Frankfort.     1600-11. 
Herberstein,   Siegmuud    von.      Selbstbiographie   1480-1553    (Foutes  Rerum  Austr.  i, 

67-396). 
Kessler,  Joliann.     Sabbata.      Ed.  Goelsinger.      St  Gall.     1870.    Also  edited  by  Egli 

and  Sclioch.     St  Gall.     1902. 
Konigstein,  W.     Tagebuch,  1520-48.     Ed.  G.  E.  Steitz.    Frankfort.     1876. 
Lauterbacli,  A.     Tagebuch.    Ed.  Seidemaun.     Dresden.     1872. 
Leib,  Killian.      Annales,  1502-23.      Ed.  Aretiu,  BeytrJige  vii,  ix  (Munich,  1803-6),  and 

1524-48  in  DoUiuger,  Beitrage  ii  (Hatisbon,  1863), 
Lenz,  M.     Brief  wechsel  Landgraf  Philipps  d.  Grossen  von  Hessen  mit  Bucer,     Publi- 

eatiouen  aus  den  Preuss.  Archiven.     Berlin.     1880  etc. 
Mathesius,  J.     Ausgewahlte  Werke.     Ed.  G.  Loesche.    Prague.     1896-8. 
Melanchthon,  Philip.     Historia  de  vita  et  actis  Lutheri.     Wittenberg.     1546. 
Mencke,  J.  B.     Scriptores  rerum   Germanicarum  praccipue   Saxonicarum.     Leipzig. 

3  vols.     1728-30. 
Myconius,  Friedrich.     Historia  Reformationis.     1517-42.     Ed.  E.  S.  Cyprian.    Leipzig. 

1718. 
Prinsen,  J.     Collectanea  van  Gerardus  Geldenhauer  Noviomagus.     Amsterdam.     1901. 
llatzeberger,   M.      Handschriftliche   Geschichte  liber    Luther  nud   seine  Zeit.      Ed. 

Neudecker.    Jena.     1850. 
Scheurl,  Chr.     Briefbuch,  1505-40.     Ed.  E.  von  Soden  and  Knaake.     Potsdam.    2  vols. 

1867-72. 
Scultetus,  Abr.    Annales  (to  1536).    In  von  der  Hardt's  Historia  Literaria.    Frankfort. 

1717. 
Seckendorf,  Veit  Ludwig.     Comment.  Hist,  de  Lutheranismo.     Frankfort.     1G92. 
Senckenberg,  H.  C.     Sammlung  vou  ungedruckt  und  raren  Schriften  zu  Erlauteruug 

der  Rcchte  und  Geschichte  von  Teutschland.     4  parts.     Frankfort.     1745-51. 
Sleidan  [vcre   Philippaon],  Johann.     Comment,  de  statu  religionis  Carlo  V   Caesare. 

Sti'assburg.     1555.      (Cf.  F.  W.  Weise,  Uber  die  Qnellen  der  Comment.  Sleidans, 

Halle,   1879;  Baumgarten,  Ueber  Sleidans  Leben  und  Briefwechsel,   Strassburg, 

1878,    and   Sleidans   Briefwechsel,    Strassburg,   1881  ;    Th.  Paur,  Sleidans  Kom- 

mentare  liber  die  Regierungszeit   Karls  V,  Leipzig,  1843 ;    and   Winckelmann, 

Sleidan  und  seine  Kommentare,  Zeitschr.  fur  Gesch.  des  Oberrheins,  N.  F.  xiv, 

565-606.) 
Spalatin  [vere  Burckard,  Georg].     Annales  Reformationis  (to  1543).     Leipzig.     1768. 

Chronikou,  1513-1526.     In  Mencke,  Vol.  ii. 

Hist.  Nachlass  und  Briefe.     Ed.   C.  G.  Neudecker.     Jena.     1851.     (Cf.  DrcAvs, 

'Spalatiniana'  in  Zeitschr.  ftir  Kirchen-Gesch.  xix-xx,  and  0.  Clemen,  Spalatini- 
ana  in  Beitrage  ii,  138-42.) 

Struve,  B.  G.     Corpus  Historiae  Germanicae.     2  vols.     Jena.     1730. 

Rerum  Germanicarum  Scriptores.     3  vols.     Strassburg.     1717. 

Surius,  Laur.      Comment,    brevis   rerum   gestarum   1500-1574.      Cologne.     1568.     [In 

answer  to  Sleidan.] 
Waltz,  0.     Flersheimer  Chronik.     Leipzig.     1874. 


C.     Secondary  Authorities 

(i)     General  histories  and  biographies  of  Charles  V 

Armstrong,  E.     The  Emperor  Charles  Y.     2  vols.     London.     1902. 
Baumgarten,  H.     Geschichte  Karls  V  (to  1539).     8  vols.     1885-92. 
Bezold,  F.  von.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Reformation.     Berlin.     1890. 
Datt,  Johann  Philipp.     Volumen  rerum  Germanicarum  novum,  sive  de  pace  imperii 
publica  (a  history  of  the  Swabiau  League).     Ulm.     1698. 


BihJi()(jraj)]iij  7)>9 


Egelhaaf,  G.     Deutsche  Geschichtc  ira   Zeitalter  tier  Reformation.    2iul   eel.    Berlin, 

1885. 
Deutsche  Gesclu  im   xvi  Jahrh.   bis   zum    \ooo.     Ribliothcli   dcutschcr  Gesch. 

Stuttgart.     2  Bile.     18S9-92. 
Fischer,  K.     Gescli.  cler  auswiirligen  Politili  uud  Diploinatie  iui  Ueforniationszeitalter. 

Gotha.     1874. 
Iliiusscr,  L.     Gesch.  des  Zeitaltcrs  der  Keforniation.     Ed.  Onclceu.     1808.     Engl.  tr. 

1885. 
Janssen,  J.     Geschichte  des  deutschcn  Vollies  seit  deni   Ausgang  dos   Mittelaltcrs. 

Vols,    iii-vi.     Ed.  L.    Pastor.     Freiburg   i.  B.     181)7.     (Gf.    Erliiiitcrungen   und 

Ergiinzungeu  zu  Jausseu's  Gescliichte,  ed.   L.  Pastor,  Freiburg  i.  B.,   18'.>8  etc. 

and  Jausscn's  An  meine  Kritiker,  Freiburg,  1883.)     English  translation  by  M.  A. 

Mitchell  and  A.  M.  Christie.     6  vols.     London.     1896-1903. 
Krebs,  K.     Beitrilge  uud  Urkunden  zur  deutscheu  Geschichte  im  ZoilallL'r  der  Kef. 

Leipzig.     1895. 
Lamprecht,  K.     Deutsche  Geschichte.     Vol.  v.     Berlin.     1894-5.     (Cf.  the  criticisms 

of  II.   Oncken,    11.  Dclbriick,    and    M.  Lenz,   and    Lamprecht's    reply  in   Zwei 

Streitschrifteu,  Berlin,  1897.) 
Menzcl,  C.  A.     Ncucre  Geschichte  der  Deutscheu.     Breslau.     12  vols.     1820-48. 
Namfeche,  A.  J.     L'Empereur  Charles  V.     5  torn.     Louvain.     1889. 
Kitzsch,  K,  W.     Geschichte  des  deutschen   Volkes  bis   zum   Augsburger  Beligions- 

frieden.     3  vols.     2nd  ed.     Leipzig.     1883-5,  1892. 
Pichot,  A.     Charles  Quint,  Clironique  de  sa  vie.     Paris.     1854. 
Ranke,  Leopold  von.     Deutsclie   Gescliichte   im    Zeitalter   der  Reformation.     6   vols. 

6th  ed.    Leipzig.    1882.    Vols,  i-in  of  Siimmtliche  Werke.    Leipzig.    1874,  etc. 
Robertson,  William.     History  of  the  Reign   of    the   Emperor   Charles  V.     London. 

3  vols.     1770.     10th  ed.  1802.     Latest  ed.     London.     1887. 
Vandeuesse,  J.    Journal  des  voyages  de  Charles  Quint.     Ed.  Gachard.    Brussels.    1874. 
Zeller,  J.     Hist.  d'Allemagne.     Vol.  v.     Paris.     1891. 

The  Allgemeine  deutsche  Biographic  (4G  Bde,  Leipzig,  1875-1902)  and  Herzog's 
Realencyklopiidie  flir  Protestantische  Theologie  und  Kirche  (2nd  ed.  18  Bde,  Leipzig, 
1877,  etc.)  are  both  indispensable  works  of  reference,  the  articles  being  usually  careful 
monographs  v^ritten  by  specialists  and  enriched  by  useful  bibliograpliical  notes. 
Compare  also  numerous  contributions  by  Baumgarten,  J.  Roth,  Kawerau,  KoUle,  and 
other  scholars  to  the  '  Schriften  des  Vereins  fiir  Reformationsgeschiclite  '  (1883-1903). 


(ii)      Works  on  EclUjious  Ilistvry 

Alzog,  G.     Handbuch  der  allgemeincn  Kirchengeschichte.     10th  ed.,  by  F.  X.  Kraus. 

Vol.  II.     Mainz.     1882. 
Baum,  J.  W.     Capito  uud  Butzer.     Viiter  der  Reformirten  Kirche.     Elbfrfeld.     ISCO. 
Baumgarten,  H.     Jakob  Sturm.     Strasslnirg.     1876. 
Bayer,  G.     Johannes  Brenz.     Stuttgart.     1899. 
Bubucke,    H.      Wilhelm    Gnaplueus,    ein    Lehrcr,     aus    dem     Reforniationszeitalter. 

Emden.     1875. 
Bugenliagen,  Joannes.      Lives   of,   by  L.    AV.    Graepp   (Giitersloh,    1897),   H.    lloring 

(Halle,  1889),  C.  A.  T.  Vogt  (Klborfcld,  1867). 
Carriere,  M.      Y>\g   Philosophische   WcUansdiauung   der   Reformationszeit    in    iliren 

Beziehuiigen  zur  Gegenvvart.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1887. 
Dollinger,    J.    J.    I.      Beitriige   zur   politischcn,    kirchliclien,    und   CuUnr-Gcscliiclite. 

2^-0^.     Ratisbon.     1862-3. 
Die  Reformation.     3  vols.     Ratisbon.     1846-8. 


740  German!/,  1521-55 

Erichson,  A.    Martin  Butzer.     Strassburg.     1891. 

rabriciiis,  J.  A.     Centifolium  Lutherannin.     Hamburg.     1728-30. 

Fuessli,  J.  C.     Carlstadts  Lebensgeschichte.     Frankfort.     1776. 

Gerdes,    D.      Scrinium    Autiquariura   ...    ad    hist.    Ref.    eccl.    spectant.     8    vols. 

Grouingen.     1749-G5. 
Gulick,  W.  von.    Johann  Gropper  und  seine  Thiitigkeit  in  Koln  bis  1510.     Mlinster. 

1902. 
Hase,  C.  A.     Kircliengeschichte.     Leipzig,     lltlied.     188G. 
Hartmann,  Julius.    Leben   und   ausgewalilte  Scliriften  der  Vater  der  lutlieranisctien 

Kirche.     5  pts.     Elberfeld.     1861-70. 

E.  Schnepff,  der  Reforraator  in  Schwaben  etc.     Tiibingen.     1870. 

and  Jaeger,  C.     Joliann  Brenz.    2  vols.     Hamburg.     1840-2. 

Haussleiter,  J.     Melanclithon-Korapendium.     Greifswald.     1902. 

Heppe,  H.  L.  J.  Dogmatik  des  deutsclieu  Protestantismus  im  16  Jalirli.  3  vols. 
Gotlia.     1857. 

Geschichte  der  lutherischen  Concordienf  ormel  und  Concordie.    2  vols.    Marburg. 

1857-9. 

Jacoby,  H.     Die  Liturgik  der  Reformatoren.     Gotha.     1871  etc. 

Jaeger,  C.  F.     Andreas  Bodenstein  von  Carlstadt.     Stuttgart.     1856. 

Jager,  C.     Mittlieilungen  zur  schwiibischen  und  franlvischen  Reformationsgeschichte. 

Stuttgart.     1828. 
Jarcke,  C.  E.     Studien  und  Skizzen  zur  Gescliiclite  der  Reformation.     Schafl'liausen. 

1846. 
Kawerau,  "W.     Thomas  Murner.     Halle.     1890-1. 

G.     Johann  Agricola  von  Eisleben.     Berlin.     1881. 

Hieronymus  Eraser.     Halle.     1896. 

Keil,  F.  S.     Luthers  Lebensumstilnde.     4  pts.     Leipzig.     1764. 
Keim,  C.  T.     Ambrose  Blaui-er,  der  schwabische  Reformator.     Stuttgart.     1860. 
Keller,  L.     Die  Reformation  und  die  alteren  Reformparteien.     Leipzig.     1885. 
Kolde,  Th.     Beitrage  zur  Reformationsgeschichte,  in  Kirchengeschichtliche  Studien. 
1888  etc. 

Andreas  Althamer,  der  Humanist  und   Reformator   in  Brandeuburg-Ansbach. 

Erlangen.     1895. 

Kurtz,  J.  H.     Lehrbuch  der  Kirchengeschichte.     11th  ed.     Leipzig.     1890. 
Kiigelgen,  C.  W.     Luthers  Auffassung  von  der  Gottheit  Christi.     Leipzig.     1901. 

Rechtfertigungslehre  des  Jobs.  Brenz.     Leipzig.     1898. 

Lemmens,  Leonliard.     Augustin  von  Alfeld.     Freiburg.     1897. 
Liessem,  H.  J.     Groppers  Leben  und  Wirken.     Cologne.     1876. 

Luther,  Martin.  Lives  of,  by  Th.  Kolde,  2  vols.,  1884-93;  J.  Kostlin,  2  vols.,  Elber- 
feld, 1875,  5th  ed.  1902;  Kuhn,  3  vols.,  Paris,  1883;  M.  Lenz,  3rd  ed.,  Berlin, 
1897;  Plitt  and  Petersen,  Leipzig,  1883;  H.  E.  Jacobs,  New  York,  1898;  P.  M. 
Bade,  3  vols.,  Tubingen,  1901. 

Marheinecke,  Ph.     Geschiclite  der  teutschen  Reformation.     4  vols.     Berlin.     1831-4. 

Maurenbrecher,  W.     Geschichte  der  katliolischen  Reformation.     Nordlingen.     1880. 

Studien  und  Skizzen  zur  Geschiclite  der  Reformationszeit.     Leipzig.     1874. 

Melanchthon    (vere   Schwarzerd),  Philip.     Lives   of,  by  G.  EUinger   (Berlin,  1902); 

J.  W.  Richard  (New  York,  1898)  ;  R.  Schaefer  (Gutersloh,  1897)  ;  and  Schmidt 
(Elberfeld,  1861). 
Moeller,  W.     Andreas  Osiander.     Elberfeld.     1870. 

Reformation  und  Gegenreforraation.     Freiburg.     1899. 

History  of  the  Christian  Cliurch.     Vol.  iii,  trs.  J.  H.  Freese.     London.     1900. 

Mosen,  P.  E.     Hieronymus  Eraser.     Leipzig.     1890. 

Miiller,  Karl.    Kirchengeschichte.    A^'ol.  ii.    Tiibingen.     1902. 

Neudecker,  C.  G.     Gesch.  der  deutschen  Reformation  von  1517-1532.     Leipzig.     1843. 

Neue  Beitrage  zur  Gesch.  der  Ref.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1841. 

Gesch.    des   evaugelischen    Protestantismus  in  Deutschlaud.     2  pts.     Leipzig. 

1844. 


Bibliofjraphfj  711 


Pastor,   Liidwig.     Die    kirchlichen    Reunionsbestrebungea    wfihrend    der    lieglerung 
Karls  V.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1879. 

Geschichte  der  Papste.     2nd  ed.     Freiburg.     1888  etc.     Engl,  transl.  by  Antro- 

bus.     London.     1801  etc. 

Paulus,  N.     Die  Strassburger  Reformatoren  und  die  Gewissensfreiheit.     Strassburg. 
1895. 

Der  Augustinermonch  Johannes  Hoffmeister.     Freiburg.     1891. 

Postina,  A.     Eberhard  Billick.     Freiburg.     1901. 

Pressel,  Th.     Arabrosius  Blaurers  des  Schwabischen  Reforuiators  Leben  und  Schrif ten. 
Stuttgart.     1861. 

Anecdota  Brentiana.     Tubingen.     18G8. 

Schafer,  E.     Luther  als  Kirchenhistoriker.     GUtersloh.     1897. 

W.     Galerie  der  Reformatoren.     5  vols.     Meissen.     1838-43. 

Scheel,  O.     Luthers  Stellung  zur  heiligen  Schrift.     Tiibingen.     1902. 

Schlegel,  J.  K.   T.     Kirchen-  und   Reforraationsgeschichte  von  Xorddeutschland  und 

den  Hannover'schen  Staaten.     3  vols.     Hanover.     1828-32. 
Schmidt,  G.  L.     Justus  Menius,  der  Reformator  Thuringens.     2  vols.     Gotha.     1867. 
Schott,  Th.     Luther  und  die  deutsche  Bibel.     2nd  ed.     Stuttgart.     1883. 

Briefwechsel  zwischen  Christoph,  Herzog  von  Wiirtemberg  und  P.  P.  Vergerius. 

Stuttgart,  Literarischer  Vcrein,  1843  etc.     Vol.  cxxiv. 

Seidemann,    J.    K.      Beitriige     zur     Reformationsgeschichte.       2     vols.       Dresden. 
1846-8. 

Erlauterungen  zur  Reformationsgeschichte.     Dresden.     1872. 

Karl  von  Miltitz.     Dresden.     1844. 

Seitz,  O.     Die  Theologie  d.  Urbanus  Rhegius,  speziell  sein  Verhaitnis  zu  Luther  und 

Zwingli.     Gotha.     1898. 
Soden,  F.  von.     Beitrage  zur  Gesch.  der  Reformation  und  der  Sitten  jener  Zeit.     Niirn- 

berg.     1855. 
Spahn,  M.     Joh.  Cochlaus.     Berlin.     1897.     (Cf.  Th.  Kolde  in  Realencyklop.  fiir  Prot. 

Theologie,  iv,  194-200.) 
Thomas,  G.  M.     M.  Luther  und  die  Reformationsbewegung  in  Deutschland  1520-32. 

Ansbach.     1883. 
Vogel,  E.  G.     Bibliotheca  biographica  Lutherana.     Halle.     1851. 
Wedewer,  H.  G.     Joannes  Dietenberger.     Freiburg.     1888. 
Wiedemann,  Th.     Johann  Eck.     Ratisbon.     1865. 


(iii)     Literature  and  Art 

Erhard,  H.  A.     Geschichte  des  Wicderaufbluhens  wissenschaftlicher  Bildung.     3  vols. 

Magdeburg.     1827-32. 
Geiger,  L.     Renaissance  und  Humanismus  in  Deutschland.     Berlin.     1882. 
Hagen,  C.     Deutschlands  literarische  und  relig.  Verhiiltnisse  im  Reforraationszeitalter. 

3  vols.     Frankfort.     1868. 
Heller,  J.     Lucas  Cranach's  Leben  und  Werke.     2nd  ed.    Nurnberg.     1854. 
Holstein,  H.     Die  Reformation  im  Spiegelbilde  der  dramatischen   Litteratur  des  16 

Jahrh.     Halle.     1886. 
Kawerau,  W.     Hans  Sachs  und  die  Reformation.     Halle.     1889. 
Kuczynski,  A.    Thesaurus  libellorum  historiam  Reformatorum  illustrantiuni.     Leipzig. 

1870 
Miiller,  J.*    Luthers  reformatorische  Verdienste  uni  Schule  und  Unterricht.     Berlin. 

1903.  .  ,        ,, 

Schade,   O.     Satiren   und   Pasquillcn   aus   der   Rcformationszeit.     3  vols.      Hanover. 

1856-8.  ,         ^    .      . 

Schluchardt,  C.     Lukas  Cranachs  Leben  und  Werke.    2  vols.     Leipzig.     1S.»1. 


742  Germany^  1521-55 

Schmidt,  C.     Histoire  litteraire  de  I'AlScace.     Paris.     2  vols.     1879. 

La  Vie  et  les  Travaux  de  Jeau  Sturm.     Strassburg.     1855. 

Schweitzer,  Ch.     Etude  sur  Haus  Sachs.     Nancy.     1887. 

Strobel,  G.  T.    Beytrage  zur  Litteratur  besouders  des  xvi  Jahrh,     2  vols.     Niiraberg, 
1784-7. 

Neue  Beytrage.    5  vols.     Niirnberg.     1790-4. 

Thausing,  M.     Durers  Briefe,  Tagebticher  und  Reime.     Wien.     1872.     2nd  ed.     1884. 
Von  der  Hardt,  Hermann.     Historia  Literaria  Ref  ormationis.     Leipzig.    5  pts.    1717. 
Zucker,  M.    Diirer's  Stellung  zur  Reformation.     Erlangen.     1886. 

See  also  works  on  the  universities  of  Erfurt  (by  Kampschulte,  2  vols..  Trier, 
1856-60) ;  Heidelberg  (by  J.  F.  Hautz,  2  vols.,  Mannheim,  1862-4) ;  Marburg  (by 
K.  W.  Justi,  Marburg,  1827)  ;  Konigsberg  (by  M.  Toppen,  Konigsberg,  1844)  ;  Jena 
(by  J.  C.  E.  Schwarz,  Jena,  1858);  Tubingen  (by  R.  von  Mohl,  Tubingen,  1871,  and 
Kliipfel,  Leipzig,  1877),  and  Wittenberg  (by  F.  L.  C.  von  Medem,  Anclam,  1867,  and 
G.  Buchwald,  Leipzig,  1893),  and  the  Geschichte  der  Wissenschaften  in  Deutschland. 


(iv)     Sociology.,  Economics,  and  Oeography 

Barthold,  F.  "W.     Geschichte  der  deutscheu  Sttidte  und  des  deutschen  Burgerthums. 

4  pts.     Leipzig.     1850-3. 
Ehrenberg,  R.     Das  Zeitalter  der  Fugger.     2  vols.    Jena.     1896.     (Cf.  die  Stellung  der 

Fugger  zum  Kirchenstreite  des  xvi  Jahrh.  in  Hist.  Vierteljahrsschr.     1898,  473- 

510.) 
Erhardt,  P.     Die  nationalokonomischen  Ansichten  der  Reformatoren.     Theol.  Studiea 

und  Kritiken.     Hamburg.     1880-1. 
Fischer,  K.     Deutschlands  offentliche  Meinung  im  Reforraationszeitalter  und  in  der 

Gegenwart.     Berlin.     1895. 
Heller,    V.    Die    Handelswege    Inner-Deutschlands.      N.   Archiv    flir   Sachs.     Gesch. 

Vol.  V. 

Hentzner,  Paul.     Itinerarium  Germaniae Niirnberg.     1612. 

Hering,  H.    Ueber  die  Liebesthatigkeit  der  deutschen  Reformation.     (To  1529.)     In 

Theol.  Stndien  und  Kritiken.     Hamburg.     1883-5. 
Kaser,  K.    Politische  und  soziale  Bewegungen  im  deutschen  Biirgerthum  zu  Beginn  des 

16  Jahrh.     Stuttgart.     1899. 
Kawerau,  W.     Die  Reformation  und  die  Ehe.     Halle.     1892. 
Liliencrou,  R.  von.     Deutsches  Leben  im  Volkslied  um  1530.     Stuttgart.     1886. 
Munster,  Sebastian.     Cosmographia.     Basel.     1545. 
Nobbe,   H.     Die  Regelung  der   Armenpflege    im   16  Jahrli.      Zcitschr.   filr  Kirchen- 

gesch.  X. 
Richter,  P.  E.     Bililiotheca  geographica  Germaniae.     Leipzig.     1896. 
Riggenbach,  B.     Das  Armenweseu  der  Reformation.    Basel.     1883. 
SchmoUer,   G.     Zur    Gesch.    der   national-okonomischen    Ansichten    in    Deutschland 

wiihrend  der  Reformationsperiode.     Zeitschr.  ftir  d.  Ges.  Staatswiss.     Vol.  xvi. 
Stern,  A.     Die  Socialisten  der  Reformationszeit.     Berlin.     1883. 

Sugenheim,  S.     Frankreichs  Einfluss  auf  Deutschland.     2  vols.     Stuttgart.     1845-56. 
Voigt,  J.     Fiirstenleben  und  Fiirstensitte.     Raumer's  Hist.  Taschenbuch,  1835. 
Werner,  J.      Die  soziale  Frage  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.      1889.      In  Weber's 

Sammlung  theologischer  und  socialer  Reden  und   Abhandlungen.      Miihlheim. 

1888  etc. 

See  also  SchmoUer's  Staats-  und  sozialwlssenschaftliche  Forschnngen,  18  vols. 
Leipzig,  1878  etc. ;  and  the  Zeitschrift  fiir  sozial-  und  wirthschaf tliche  Geschichte. 
Freiburg,  1893-1903. 


Bihlioyrcqjhu  743 


(v)    Constitutional  History 

Beitriige  zur  Geschichte  des  romischen  Rechts  in  Ueutschland.     Stuttgart.     189G  etc. 

Below,  G.  von.     Territoriiim  und  Stadt.     Ilistorische  Bibliothek.     1900. 

Boehmer,  J.  H.     Meditatioues  in  constitutionem  criminalera  Carolitiam.     Halle.     1770. 

Jns  Ecclesiasticnm  Protestantiuiu.     5  vols.     Halle.     1720-C;!. 

Brunner,  H.     Eorschungen  zur  Geschichte  des  deutscheii  Keichs.     Stuttgart.     1894. 
Elchhoru,  C.  F.     Deutsche  Staats-  und  Rechtsgeschichte.     4  pts.      Goithigen.     1821-3. 
Furstenv»erth,  L.     Die  Verfassungsiinderungen  in  den  Reichsstiidtcn  zur  Zeit  Karls  V. 

Gottiugen.     1893. 
Gierke,  Otto.     Untersuchungcn  zur  deutschen  Staats-  und  Rechtsgeschichte.     Breslau. 

1878-99. 
Goldast,  Melchior.     Monarchia  S.  Romani  Imperii.     2  vols.     Frankfort.     1611-14. 

Politische  Reichshiindel.     Frankfort.     1614. 

Holtzendorff,  F.     Encyklopiidie  der  Rechtswissenschaft.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1870-1. 
Laband,  P.     Das  Staatsrecht  des  deutschen  Rcichcs.     4th  cd.     Tiibingen.     1901. 
Liinig,  J.  C.      Thesaurus   juris  der  Grafen  und  Ilerren  des  heilig.   romisch.  Keichs. 

Leipzig.      1725. 
Moser,  J.  J.     Teutsches  Staatsrecht.     50  vols.     1737-54. 
Muller,   K.   E.   H.      Reichssteuern  und  Reichsreformationsbestrebungcn   ini  xv  und 

XVI  Jahrh. 
Rachel,  Walther.      Verwaltungsorganisation  uud  Amtcrwesen  der  Stadt  Leipzig  bis 

1627.     Leipzig.     1902. 
Rieker,  Karl.     Staat  und  Kirch  nach  lutherischer,  reformirter,  moderncr  Anschauung. 

Hist.  Vierteljahrsch.     1898,  370-410. 
Schroder,  R.    Lehrbuch  der  deutschen  Rechtsgeschichte.    3rd  ed.    Leipzig.     1898. 
Stintziug,  R.     Gesch.  der  deutschen  Rechtswissenschaft.     Munich.     1880. 
Stobbe,  0.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Rechtsquellen.     2  pts.     Brunswick.     1860-4. 
Turner,  S.  E.     Sketch  of  the  Germanic  Constitution.     New  York.     1888. 


D.     Sep.\r.\te  States  and  their  Rulers 

(i)     Secular  and  territorial  Slates  and  Districts 

(a)     Austria  and  the  Austrian  Duchies 

Bachmann.  A.     Lehrbuch  der  Oesterreichischen  Reichsgeschichte.     Prague.     1896. 

Bohl,  E.     Beitriige  zur  Gesch.  der  Reformation  in  Oesterreich.     Jena.     1902. 

Buchholtz,  F.  B.     Gesch.  der  Regiening  Ferdinands  L     9  vols.     Vienna.     1831-8. 

Fontes  rerura  Austriacarum.  50  vols.  Vienna.  1849-1901.  (An  indc.v  to  these  50 
vols,  was  publ.  by  V.  Junk,  1901.) 

Gevay,  A.  Urkuuden  und  Aktenstucke  zur  Gesch.  der  Verhiiltnisse  zwischen  Oester- 
reich, Ungarn,  und  der  Pforte  1526-1541.     Vienna.     9  pts.     1838-42. 

Huber,  A.  Geschichte  Oesterreichs.  Vols.  iv-v.  (Gesch.  d.  europ.  Staalen.)  Gotha. 
1888. 

Krones,  F.  X.     Handijuch  der  Oesterreich.  Gesch.     5  vols.     Berlin.     1876-9. 

Grundriss  der  Oesterreichischen  Geschidite.     Vienna.     1882. 

Kupelweiser,  L.     Die  Kiimpfe  Oesterreichs  mit  d.  Osmanen  1526-37.     Vienna.     1899. 

Loserth,  J.  Reformation  und  Gegenreformation  in  deii  inncriisterroicli.  Landern. 
Stuttgart.     1896-8. 

Luschin  v.  Ebengreuth,  A.     Osterrcichische  Reichsgescliichte.     Bamberg.     1896. 

Raupach,  B.     Evangelische  Oesterreich.     6  pts.     Hamburg.     1732-44. 

Waldau,  G.  E.  Gesch.  der  Protestantcu  in  Oesterreich,  Stcyermark,  Kurnthen  und 
Krain.     2  pts.    1784. 


744:  Germany,  1521-55 

Wieclemanu,  Th.     Gesch.  der  Reformation  unci  Gegenreformation  im  Lande  unter  der 

Emis.     Prague.     1879. 
"Wolf,  A.     Gesch.  Bilder  aus  Oesterreich.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1866. 

See  also  the  Archiv  fiir  Kunde  Oesterreichischer  Geschichtsquellen,  33  vols., 
Vienna,  1848-65,  continued  as  the  Archiv  fiir  Oesterreichische  Geschichte,  53  vols., 
Vienna,  1865-1903. 

(b)     Baden 

Bossert,  G.     Beitrage  znr  badisch-pfalzische  Reform-Gesch.     Zeitschr.  fiir  Gesch.  des 

Oberrlieius.     Vol.  xvii.     1902. 
Fester,    R.       Die  Religionsmaudate  des    Markgrafen    Philipp  von    Baden    1522-33. 

Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirchengesch.     Vol.  xi. 
Jaeger,  Carl.     Briefe  und  Bilder  aus  dem  Gros.sherzogthura  Baden.     2  vols.     Leipzig. 

1841. 
Vierordt,  K.  F.     Gesch.  der  evangel.  Kirche  in  Baden.    2  vols.     Carlsruhe.     1847-56. 

See  also  the  Zeitschrift  fiir  Gesch.  des  Oberrheins  published  by  the  Badische 
histor,  Koramission  since  1886. 

(c)  Bavaria 

Aretin,    C.    M.    von.      Bayerns   auswartige   Verhaltnisse   seit   dem   Anfang    des  xvi 

Jahrh.     Passau.     1839. 
Muffat,  C.  A.      Correspond,   und  Aktenstiicke  zur  Gesch.  der  polit.  Verhaltnisse  der 

Herzoge  Wilhelm  und  Ludvvig  von  Baiern  1527-1541.     Munich.     1857. 
Riezler,  S.     Geschichte  Baierns.     Vol.  iv.     Gotha.     1899.     (Gesch.  d.  europ.  Staaten.) 
Rudhart,  Ignaz.     Geschichte  der  Landstiinde  in  Baiern.     2  vols.     Munich.     1819. 
Sugenheim,  S.     Bayerns  Kirchen-  und  Volkszustiinde  im  xvi  Jahrh.     Giessen.     1842. 
Winter,   V.  A.      Geschichte    der  evangelischen  Lehre    in  Baiex'n.      2   pts.      Munich. 

1809-10. 

See  also  the  Forschungen  der  konigl.  bayerischen  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften, 
Munich,  1860  etc.  (Index  to  Vols,  i-xx  publ.  by  Gustav  Buchholz,  Gottingen,  1880)  ; 
and  the  Sitzungsberichte  der  historischen  Classe  of  the  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften, 
Munich,  1871-1903. 

(d)  Bohemia 

Bachmann,  A.     Geschichte  Bohraens.     Gotha.     1899. 
Dacicky,  M.     Pameti.     Ed.  A.  Rezek.     2  vols.     Prague.     1878-80. 
Denis,  E.     Fin  de  I'independance  Boheme.     Pt.  ii.     Paris.     1890. 
Freher,  M.     Scriptores  rerum  Bohemicarum.     2  vols.     Hanover.     1602. 
Gindely,  A.     Quellen  zur  Gesch.  der  Bohraischen  Briider.     Pontes  Rerum  Austr.  xix. 
1857-8. 

Die  bohmischen  Landtagsverhandlungen,  von  1526  bis  auf  die  Neuzeit.    Prague. 

1877  etc. 

Monumenta  Historica  Bohemica.     11  pts.    Prague.     1865-70. 

Gluth,  O.     Die  Wahl  Ferdinands  I  zum  Konig  von  Bohmen.     Mittheil.  d.  Vereins  f.  d. 

Gesch.  der  Deutschen  in  Bohmen.     Prague.     1862  etc.     Vol.  xv. 
Landtagsverhandlungen,    D.   bohni.,    u.    Landtag.sbeschliisse    v.   J.    1526   bis   auf   die 

Neuzeit.     Herausg.  vom  k.  bohm.  Landesarchiv.     Prague. 
Palacky,  Fr.     Geschichte  von  Bohmen.     5  vols.     Prague.     1836-67. 
Rezek,  A.     Gesch.  der  Regierung  Ferdinands  I  in  Bohmen.     Prague.     1878. 
Rieger,  G.  C.     Die  alten  und  neuen  Bohmische  Briider.     3  vols.     Zullichau.     1734-9. 

See  also  the  publications  of  the  Verein  fiir  Geschichte  der  Deutschen  in  Bohmen. 
Prague.     1862  etc. 


Bibliography  7|."^ 


(e)     Brandenburg  and  Prussia 

Altmann,  W.  Ausgewiihlte  Urkunden  zur  brandenburg-preussischen  Verfa.ssuu"-s- 
und  Vervvaltungsgeschichte.     2  vols.     Berlin.     1897.  * 

Baczko,  L.  A.  F.  von.     Geschichte  Proussens.     6  vols.     Konigsberg.     1792-1800. 

Bornhak,  C.  Geschichte  des  preussischeu  Verwaltungsrechts.  3  vols  Berlin 
1884-8. 

Droysen,  J.  G.     Gesch.  der  preussischen  Politik.     5  vols.     Berlin.     1855-86. 

Hartknocli,  A.  C.     Preussische  Kirchenhistoria.     Frankfort.     1686. 

Heidemann,  J.     Die  Reformation  in  der  Mark  Brandenburg.     Berlin.     1889. 

Preussischen  Geschichtschreiber,  Die,  des  xvi  und  xvii  Jahrh.  Verein  fUr  die  Gesch. 
des  Preussens.     Leipzig.     187C. 

Ranke,  L.  von.     Zwolf  Biicher  preussi.scher  Geschichte.     5  vols.     Leipzig.     1874. 

Spieker,  Ch.  W.  Kirchen-  und  Reforraationsgeschichte  der  Mark  Brandenburg.  Ber- 
lin.    1839. 

Stolzel,  A.  Brandenburg-Preussens  Rechtsverwaltung  und  Rechtsverfassung.  2  vols 
Berlin.     1888. 

Tschakert,  P.  Urkundenbuch  zur  Reformationsgeschlchte  des  Herzogthunis  Preussen. 
3  vols.     Leipzig.     1890. 

Voigt,  J.  Briefwechsel  der  Gelehrten  rait  Herzog  Albrecht  von  Preussen.  Konigs- 
berg.    1841. 

See  also  the  Zeitschrift  fiir  preussische  Geschichte  und  Landeskunde,  the  Hohen- 
zoUern  Forschungen  and  the  publications  of  the  "Verein  fiir  die  Geschichte  des  Preus- 
sens. 

(f)     Brunswick 

Havemann,    H.       Geschichte     von     Braunschwelg-LUueburg.      3    vols.      Gottlngen. 

1853-7. 
Heinemann,  0.     Geschichte  von  Braunschweig  und  Hannover.     Gotha.     1882. 
Hune,    A.       Geschichte     von     Hannover    und    Braunschweig.       2    pts.      Hanover. 

1824-30. 
Koldewey,     F.      Beitrage     zur    Kirchen-    und    Schulgeschichte      des    Herzogtums 

Braunschweig.     Wolfenbiittel.     1888. 
Lentz,  C.  G.  H.     Braunschweigs  Kirchenreformation.     Leipzig.     1828. 
Spittler,  L.  T.     Geschichte  von  Caleuberg.     2  vols.     Gottlngen.     1786. 
Stiive,  J.  E.     Beschreibung  und   Geschichte  d.   Hochstifts  und  FUrstenthums  Osna- 

briick.     Osnabriick.     1789. 
Vaterlandisches  Archiv  fiir  hannoverisch-braunschw.  Geschichte.     Edd.  Spllcker  and 

Bronnenberg.     Lunebnrg.     1830-3. 
Wrede,  A.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Reformation  Im  liineburgischen  Landc.     Gottlngen. 

1887. 
Ernst  der  Bekenner,  Herzog  von  Braunschweig.     Halle.     1888. 

See  also  the  Zeitschrift  des  hlstorlscheu  Verelns  fur  Nledersachsen.     Hanover. 

(g)     Cleves-Jailch-Berg 

Below,  G.    von.     Landtagsakten  von  Jiillch-Berg.    Vol.    i.     1400-1562.     Dilsseldorf. 

1895. 
Koch,  H.  H.     Die  Reformation  in  Jullch.     2  vols.     Frankfort.     1883. 

See  also  the  Zeitschrift  des  Bergischen  Geschlchtsverelns.     Bonn.     1803  etc. 

(li)     Elsass 

Rathberger,  J.     Elsassische  Reformatlonsge.schiclite.     2  pts.     Strassl)urg.     1885. 
Rohrich,  T.  W.     Geschichte  der  Reformation  in  Elsass.     3  pts.     Strasslnirg.     1830-2. 


746  Germany,  1521-55 

(i)     Franconia 

Lith,  J.  W.  von  der.     Erlauterung  cler  f  rankischen  Ref  ormationshistorie.     Schwabach. 

1733. 
Stein,  F.    Geschichte  Frankens.     2  vols.     Schweinfurt.     1885-6. 


(j)     Hesse 

Ackermaun,  C.  A.     Bibliotheca  Ilessiaca.     10  pts.     Cassel.     1884-99. 

Glagau,  Hans.     Anna  von  Hessen.     Marburg.     1899. 

Hassencamp,   F.   W.     Hessische   Kirchengeschichte    im    Zeitalter    der    Reformation. 

2  vols.     Marburg.     1852-5. 
Hessische  Landtagsakten.     Hist.  Komm.  ftir  Hesse  uud  Waldeck.     Marburg.     1901. 
Koehler,  W.     Hessische  Kirchenverfassung  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.     Giessen. 

1894. 
Lanze,  VVigand.     Hessische  Chronik.     Zeitschr.  des  Vereins  fiir  Hessische  Geschichte. 

Cassel.     1837. 
Muenscher,  F.     Geschichte  von  Hessen.     Marburg.     1894. 
Paetel,  G.    Die  Organisation  des  hessischen  Pleeres  unter  Philipp  dera  Grossmiithigen. 

Berlin      1897. 
Rommel,  Ch.  von.    Philipp  der  Grossmiithige.     3  vols.     Giessen.     1830. 
Geschichte  von  Hessen.     10  vols.    Marburg  and  Cassel.     1820-1858. 

See  also  the  Mittheilungen  des  Oberhessischen  Vereins  fur  Geschichte,  esp.  Neue 
Folge  XI,  1-30. 

(k)     Holstein 
Waitz,  G.     Schlesvvig-Holsteins  Geschichte.    2  vols.     Gottingen.     1852. 


(1)     Hungary 

Bel,  M.     Adparatus  ad  historiam  Hungariae.     2  pts.     Posen.     1735-46. 

Compendium  Hungariae  Geographicum.     Posen.     1753. 

Csuday,  Eugen.     Die  Geschichte  der  Ungarn.     Ed.  Marvai.     Berlin.     2  vols.     1899. 

(Cf.  Hist.  Vierteljahrschrift,  1903,  i,  91  sqq.) 
Engel,  J.  C.  Monumenta  Ungrica.  Vienna.  1809. 
Fessler,  I.  A.     Die  Geschichte  der  Ungarn.     10  vols.     Leipzig.     1815-25.     [The  best 

edition,  by  E.  Klein,  is  not  in  tlie  British  Museum.] 
Horvath,  M.     Geschichte  Ungarns.     2  vols.     Pesth.     1863. 
Istvani,  N.     Regni  Hungarici  historiae  lib.  xxxiv.    Vienna.     1758. 
Katona,  Istvan.     Hist,  critica  primorum  Hungariae  Ducum.     Hist,  regum  stirpis  Aus- 

triacae.     22  vols.     Buda.     1778-1810. 
Pray,  G.  S.  J.     Epistolae  Procerura  regni  Hungariae  (to  1531).     Vienna.     1806. 
Smolka,  S.    Ferdinands  I  Bemlihungen  um  die  Krone  von  Ungarn.    Archiv  fiir  Oesterr. 

Gesch.    Vienna.     1848.     Vol.  vii. 
Verancsics,  A.     De  rebus  gestis  Joannis  [Zapolya]  Regis  Hungariae  (in  M.  G.  Kova- 

chich's  Scriptores  Rerum  Hung.,  Buda,  1798,  Vol.  II,  pp.  39  etc.). 

See  also  the  Monumenta  Hungariae   Historica  in  course   of  publication  by   the 
Magyar  Tudomanvos  Akademia.     Pesth.     1857  etc. 


(m)     Mecklenburg 

Beltz,  R.     Mecklenburgische  Geschichte  in  Einzeldarstellungen.     Berlin.     1899  etc. 
Rudloff,  F.  A.     Mecklenburgische  Geschichte.     3  pts.     Schwerin.     1780-1822. 


Bibliography  747 


Schnell,  H.     Mecklenburg  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.     Berlin.     1900. 

Schreiber,  H.     Johann  Albrecht  I,  Herzoj^  von   iMecklenburg.     Schrift.  dcs   Vereins 

fiir  Ref.  Gesch.     1890. 
Schroder,   D.     Kircheuhistorie  des  cvaugelischen   Mccklenburgs.     2   i)ts.     Rostock. 

1788. 
Stein,  F.     Herzog  Magnus  von  Mecklenburg,  Bischof  von  Schwcrin.     Schwerin.     1899. 
Von  Lutzow,  C.  E.     Geschichte  Mccklenburgs.     3  pts.     Berlin.     1827-35, 

(n)     Oldenburg 
See  Jahrbuch  fur  Geschichte  des  Herzogthums  Oldenburg.     7  vols. 

(o)     The  Talatiuate 

Alting,  H.  Historia  Ecclesiae  Palatinae.  In  Monumeuta  Pietatis.  Pt  i.  Frankfort. 
1701. 

Gothein,  E.  Die  Landstande  dcr  Kurpfalz.  Zeitschr.  fiir  Gesch.  dcs  Oberrheins. 
N.  F.     Vol.  III. 

Hausser,  L.    Gesch.  der  rheinischen  Pfalz.     2  vols.     Heidelberg.     1845. 

Jung,  H.  In  Beitrage  Bayer.  Kircheugeschichte.  Vol.  i.  [Catalogue  of  materials 
for  the  eccles.  history  of  the  Palatinate.] 

Leodius,  Hubertus  Thomas.  Annal.  de  vita  Froderici  El.  Palatini  lib.  xiv.  Frank- 
fort.    162i.     (Cf.  Hasenclever,  Die  Schnialkaldener,  1901,  pp.  242-7.) 

Lippert,  F.  Reformation  in  Kirche,  Sitte,  und  Schule  der  Oberpfalz.  Freiburg. 
1897. 

Remllng,  F.  X.     Das  Reformationswerk  in  der  Pfalz.     Mannheim.     184G. 

See  also  the  Zeitschrift   fiir  Geschichte    des  Oberrhcins,  and   Gesellschaft    fiir 
rheinische  Geschichtskunde. 

(p)     Pomerania 

Barthold,  F.  W.     Geschichte  von  Riigen  und  Pommern.     4  pts.      Hamburg.      1839-45. 
Berckraann,    Joannes.     Stralsundische  Chronik.     In  Mohnikc   and  Zober's   Stralsuu- 

dische  Chroniken.     Pt  i.     Stralsund.     1883. 
Kantzow,   Th.      Chronik   von   Pommern :    ed.    Bohraer,    Stettin    1835    and    again    in 

1896-7. 
Medem,  F.  L.  B.  von.     Geschichte  der  Eiufuhrung  der  evangel.   Lchrc   in   Pommern. 

Greifswald.     1837. 
Ripke,  J.  N.     Die  Einfiihrung  der   Reformation  in  den  baltisclieu  Provinzcn.     Riga. 

1883. 

(q)     Sa.xony 

Becker,   J.     Kurfiirst  Johann  und  seine   Beziehungen   zu  Luther  1520-8.      Leipzig. 

1890. 
Bottigcv,  C.  "VV.     Gesch.  des  Kurstaates  und  Krinigr.  Sachsen.     2nd  cd.     Hceren  and 

Ukert's  series.     Hamburg.     1867. 
Buchholtz,  G.     Bibliothek  der  sachs.  Geschichte.     Leipzig.     1902  etc. 
Burckhardt,  C.  A.    Ernestinischc  Landtagsakten  1487-1532.     Tliiiringische  Geschichts- 

quellen.     N.  F.     Vol.  v.     Jena.     1902. 
Glafey,  A.  F.     Geschichte  des  Chur-  und  Fiiratlichen   Ilauses   zn   Sachsen.     4th  cd. 

Niirnberg.     1753. 
Seidemann,  J.  K.     Die  Reformationszeit  in  Sachi^en  1517-15.39.     Dresden.     1846. 
Wachsmuth,  E.  W.  G.     NiedersJichsische  Geschichte.     Berlin.     1863. 
Welck,  H.     Georg  der  Biirtige,  Herzog  von  Sachsen.     Brunswick.     1900. 

See  also  the  Archiv  and  Neues  Archiv  fiir  Sitchsische  Geschichte;  the  Oeschichts- 
quellen  der  Provinz  Sachsen,  Magdeburg,  28  vols. ;  the  GcschichtsqucUeu  dcr  I'roviiiz 


748  Gevmamj,  1521-55 

Sachsen  imd  angrenzenden  Gebiete,  xxx  vols.,  Halle;  and  the  Publications  of  the 
Siichsische  Kommission  fur  Geschichte,  which  has  in  preparation  the  Akten  und  Briefe 
des  Herzogs  Georg,  the  Pol.  Corresp.  of  Maurice,  a  bibliograpliy  of  Saxon  history  by 
Hautzsch,  and  Akten  zur  Geschichte  des  Bauei'nkrieges. 

(r)     Silesia 

Biermann,  G.     Geschichte  des  Protestantisraus  in  Oesterreichisch-Schlesien.    Prague. 

1897. 
Soflner,  J.     Gesch.  der  Reformation  in  Schlesien.     Breslau.     1887. 
Wachter,  F.     Schlesien  unter  Ferdinand  1524-64.     Zeitschr.  des  Vereins  ftlr  Gesch. 

Schlesiens.    Vol.  xix.     Breslau.     1856  etc. 

(s)     Swabia 

Baumann,  F.  L.     Forschungen  zur  schwabischen  Geschichte.     Kempten.     1898. 
Keim,  C.     Schwabische  Reform ationsgeschichte.     Tubingen.     1855. 
Pflster,  J.  C.     Geschichte  von  Schwaben.     5  vols.     Stuttgart.     1803-1827. 

See  also  the  Zeitschrift  des  historischen  Vereins  fiir  Schwaben  und  Neuburg. 

(t)     WUrttemberg 

Ernst,  V.     Briefvvechsel  des  Herzogs  Christoph.     2  vols.     Stuttgart.     1899-1901. 
Hartmann,  J.     Wiirttembergische  Kirchengeschichte.     Stuttgart.     1893. 

Geschichte  der  Reformation  in  Wurttemberg.     Stuttgart.     1835. 

Heyd,  L.  F.     Ulrich,  Herzog  zu  Wurttemberg.     3  vols.     Tubingen.     1841-4. 

W.      Bibliographie    der    wurttembergischen    Geschichte.      2   vols.      Stuttgart. 

1897. 

Kugler,  B.     Herzog  Ulrich  von  Wurttemberg.     Stuttgart.     1865. 

Christoph,  Herzog  zu  Wurttemberg.     2  vols.     Stuttgart.     1868-72. 

Pflster,  J.  C.     Herzog  Christoph  zu  Wurttemberg.    2  pts.     Tiibingen.     1819-20. 
Sattler,  C.  F.     Gesch.  des  Herzogthums  WUrttemberg.     5  pts.     Ulm.     1764-8. 
Schafer,  D.     Wiirttembergische  Geschichtsquellen.     Stuttgart.     Vols.  1-11.     1894-5. 
Schmid,  J.  C. ,  and  Pflster,  J.  C.    Denkwiirdigkeiten  der  Wiirttemberg.  und  Schwabischen 

Reformationsgeschichte.     2  vols.     Tiibingen.     1817. 
Schneider,  E.     Wiirttembergische  Geschichte.     Stuttgart.     1896. 

WUrttembei'gische  Reformationsgeschichte.     Stuttgart.     1887. 

Stalin,  P.  F.  von.     Gesch.  Wirtembergs.     Vol.  iv.     Stuttgart.     1873. 

See  also  the  Wiirttembergische  Vierteljahrshefte   fiir  Landesgeschichte  and  the 
Zeitschrift  of  the  Verein  fiir  das  Wiirttembergische  Franken. 

(ii)     Ecclesiastical  States 

Augsburg.     Braun,  P.  L.     Geschichte  der  Bischofe  von  Augsburg.    4  vols.     Augs- 
burg.    1813-15. 
Steichele,  A.     Das  Bisthum  Augsburg.     Augsburg.     1861  etc. 
Bamberg.      Erhard,  O.     Die  Reformation  in  Bamberg   1522-1556.      Erlangen.     1898. 
Heller,  Joseph.      Reformationsgeschichte   des  ehemaligen    Bisthums  Bamberg. 

Bamberg.     1825. 
Looshorn,   J.      Die   Geschichte  des   Bisthums  Bamberg.      Munich.      1886   etc. 
Vol.  IV. 
Cologne.      Ennen,  L.      Gesch.    der  Ref.    im    Bereiche  der    alten    Erzdiocese    Koln. 
Cologne.     1849. 
Ley,  C.  A.     Die  Kolnische  Kirchengeschichte.     Cologne.     1882. 
Meyer,  C.     Koln  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.     1892.      (Sammlung  wiss.  Vor- 
trage,  N.  F.    Ser.  vii.  No.  153.) 
Halberstadt.     Langenbeck,  W.     Gesch,  der  Ref.  des  Stiftes.     Gottingen.     188G. 


Bibliography  749 

Mainz.      Gudenus,   V.    F.      Codex   diplomalicus   MoKuntinus.      Giittii^^^ii^      1743-G8 
Hennes,  J.     Albrccht  von   Urandenbur-    Erzhischof  von   Mainz.     Mainz      1858 
May,  J.     Dcr  Kurfiirst,  Kardiual,  uud  Erzbischof  Albrcclit  II.     -j  vols.     Munich 
1865-75. 
Redlich,  P.     Kardinal  Albrecht  von  Brandenburg.     Mainz.     I'JOO. 

Miinsler.     Erhard,  11.  A.     Gescliiclite  Munsters.     Munster.     1837. 

Salzburg.      Schniid,   J.     Anfang    der    Reformation    im    Erzstift    Salzljure    15 IT-^-) 
Salzburg.     1899. 

See  also  the  Mittheilungen  der  Gesellschaft  fur  Salzburg.  Laudeskuude.     40  vols. 

Speicr.    Remling,  F.  X.    Geschichte  der  Bischofe  von  Speier.    2  vols.    Mainz.    1852-4. 

Urkundenbuch  zur  Geschichte  der  Bischilfe  von  Speier.    2  vols.     Maiuz 

1852-3. 
Trier.     Die  Reformation  in  Trier.     Bonn.     1845. 
Wiirzburg.     Ludewig,  J.  P.     Wurzburgische  Geschichtsschreiber.     Frankfort.     ITl.J. 

Braun,  C.    Gesch.  der  Heranbildung  des  Klerus  in  der  Diocese  Wurzburg.    2  vols. 

Wiirzburg.     1889-97. 


(iii)    The  Cities 

The  most  important  source  for  the  history  of  German  cities  is  the  great  series  of 
Chroniken  der  deutschen  Stadte,  ed.  Karl  Hegel,  xxi.x  vols.,  Leipzig,  1862-1902,  which 
is  still  in  progress.  It  comprises  at  present  the  Niirnberg  'Clironiken'  (5  vols.), 
Augsburg  (5  vols.),  Brunswick  (2  vols.),  Magdeburg  (2  vols.),  Strassbnrg  (2  vols.), 
Cologne  (3  vols.),  Regensburg  (1  vol.),  Mainz  (2  vols.),  Liibeck  (3  vols.),  and  the 
Westphalian  and  Lower  Rhine  cities  (3  vols.).  Besides  this  series  most  large  German 
towns  have  published  or  are  publishing  their  '  Urkuudenbiicher,'  but  this  class  of  docu- 
ment refers  generally  to  a  period  earlier  than  the  Reformation.  The  more  important 
towns  have  also  as  a  rule  their  'Gesellschaft,'  '  Archiv,' or  '  Vercin  fiir  Geschichte,* 
and  it  would  require  a  whole  volume  to  enumerate  the  various  political  and  constitu- 
tional histories  of  German  towns.  The  following  list  comprises  only  histories  of  the 
Reformation  in  some  of  the  more  important  towns  which  materially  influenced  the 
general  course  of  German  history. 

Augsburg.     Jaeger,  C.     Gesch.  der  Stadt  Augsburg.     Darmstadt.     1837. 

Roth,  Fr.     Augsburgs  Reforraationsgeschichte  1517-30.     Munich.     1881.     Re-ed. 

Augsburg.     1901. 
Von  Stettcn,  Paul.     Geschichte  der  Reichsstadt  Augsburg.     Augsburg.     1762, 

1788. 
Wolfart,  K.     Die  Augsburger  Reformation  in  1533-4.     Leipzig.     1901. 
Colmar.     Rochnll,  II.     Anfiinge  der  Reformation  in  Colmar.     Leipzig.     1875-8. 

Die  Einfiihrung  der  Reformation  in  Colmar.     Leipzig.     1876. 

Constance.     Issel.  E.     Reformation  in  Konstanz.     Freiburg.     1898. 
Laible,  J.     Geschichte  der  Stadt  Konstanz.     Constance.     1896. 
Esslingen.     Keim,  C.  T.     Reformationsbliitter  der  Rcichstadt  Esslingen.     Esslingcn. 

1860. 
Frankfort.     Jung,  R.     Frankfurter  Chroniken  und  annalistische  Atifzeiclinungen  der 
Reformationszeit.     Frankfort.     1888. 
Steitz,  G.  E.     Der  lutherische  Pradikant  II.  Beyer.     Ein  Zoitbild  aus  I'rankfurts 
Kirchengeschichte.     Frankfort.     1852. 
Goslar.     H61scher,"n.     Gesch.  der  Reformation  in  Goslar.     Hanover.     1902. 
Gottingen.     Erdemann,  G.     Gesch.  der  Reformation.     Giittingen.     1888. 
Grcifswald.     Uckcley,  A.     Reform-Gcsch.  der  Sludt  (Jreifswald.     (ircifswald.     1902. 


750  Germany,  1521-55 

Hamburg.     Goos,  M.      Hamburgs   Politik   urn   die  Mitte  des  xvi  Jahrh.     Hamburg. 
1896. 
Sillem,  H.  C.  W.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Reformatiou  in  Hamburg.     Vereiu  fiir 
Ref.  Gescli.     Halle.     1886. 
Hanover.     Balirdt,  W.     Gesch.  der  Eef.     Hanover.     1891. 
Leipzig.     Buclnvald,  G.      Reformationsgeschiclite  der  Stadt  Leipzig.      Leipzig.     1900. 

Seifert,  F.     Die  lieformation  in  Leipzig.     Leipzig.     1883. 
Liibeck.     Schreiber,  H.     Die  Reformation  Llibecks.     Halle.     1902. 
Liineburg.     Wrede,  A.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Reformation  in  Liineburg.     Gottingen. 

1887. 
Magdeburg.     Huelsse,  F.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Ref.  in  der  Stadt  Magdeburg.     Magde- 
burg.    1883. 
Marburg.      Kolbe,    W.      Die  Eiufulirung  der  Reformation  in  Marburg.      Marburg. 

1871. 
Memmingen.     Dobel,  F.     Memmingen  im  Eeforraationszeitalter.    5  pts.    Memmingen. 
1877-8. 
Unold,  J.  F.    Ref  ormationsgeschichte  der  Stadt  Memmingen.    Memmingen.    1817. 
Nordlingeu.     Ge3er,   C.      Die  Nordlinger  evangelischen  Kirchenorduungen  des  xvi 

Jahrhunderts.     Munich.     1896. 
Niirnberg.     Baader,  J.     Beitrage  zur  Kunstgesch.  Nilrnbergs.    Nordlingeu.     1860. 

Heide,  G.     Beitrage   zur  Gesch.  Niirnbergs  in  der  Reformationszeit.     Mauren- 

brecher's  Taschenbuch,  1892. 
Liidewig,  S.     Die  Politik  Niirnbergs  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.     Gottingen. 

1893. 
Roth,  F.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Reformatiou  in  Niirnberg.     Wiirzburg.     1885. 

On  J.  Milliner's  ms.  Annales  of  Niirnberg  see  Lochner  in  Hist.  Pol.  Blatter  lxxiv, 
841-865,  901-924. 

Ratisbon.     Gemeiner,  Carl  T.    Regensburgische  Chronik.    4  vols.    Ratisbon.    1800-24. 

Geyer,  W.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Reformation  in  Regeusburg.     Ratisbon.     1892. 
Reutlingen.     Hartraaun,  Julius.     Matthaus  Alber,   der  Reformator  der  Reichsstadt 

Rentlingen.     Tiibingen.     1863. 
Strassburg.     Baum,  A.     Magistrat  uud  Reformation  in  Strassburg  bis  1529.     Strass- 
burg.     1»87. 
Birck,  H.     Die  politische  Correspondenz  der  Stadt  Strassburg  im  Zeitalter  d. 

Reformation.     Strassburg.     1882  etc. 
Gerbert,  C.     Gesch.  der  Strassb.  Sektenbewegung  1524-34.     Strassburg.     1889. 
Hubert,    F.      Die  Strassburg.    Liturg.-Orduungen  im   Zeitalter  der  Ref.     Got- 
tingen.    1900. 
Reuouard  de  Bussiere,   M.   T.     Hist,    de  I'Etablissement  du  Protestantisme  ii 

Strasbourg.     Paris.     1856. 
Hist,  du  Developpemeut  du  Protestantisme  a  Strasbourg.     2  vols.     Strass- 
burg.    1859. 
Virck,  H. ,  and  Winckelmann,  O.     Politische  Korresp.  der  Stadt  Strassburg  im 
Zeitalter  der  Ref.     Vol.  i.      Strassburg.      1879.     Vol.  ii.     1887.     Vol.  iii. 
1898. 
Ulm.     Keim,  C.  T.     Die  Reformation  der  Reichsstadt  Ulm.     Stuttgart.     1851. 
AVorms.     Soldau,  Hans.     Beitrage  zur  Gesch.  der  Stadt  Worms.     Worms.     1896. 


Bibliography  751 


III.     MONOGRAPHS,   ETC.,   REFERRING   TO    SEPARATE   CHAPTERS 

A.     CriArxER  Y.     National  Opposition  to  Romk 

Baader,  Joseph.     Die  Fehcle  des  Thomas  von  Absberg  wider  den  Schwabischen  Bund. 

Munich.     1880. 
Balan,  P.    Monuruenta  Reformatiouis  Lutberanae  ex  tabulis  S.  Sedis  secretis  1521-6. 

Ratisbou.     1883-4. 
Barge,    H.     Neue  Alvtenstiicke    zur  Gesch.   d.    Wittenberger    Unruhcn    von    1521-2. 

Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirch. -Gesch.  xxii,  120-9. 
Barthold,  F.  W.     Georg  vou  Fruudsberg.     Hamburg.     1833. 
Baur,  A.     Deutscliland  iu  den  Jaliren  1517-27.     Ulm.     1872. 
Bogler,  W.     Hartmuth  von  Kronberg.     Zeitschr.  fiir  Reform-Gesch.  no.  57,  1897. 
Brasse,  Ernst.     Die  Gesch.    des   Siieierer  Nationallcouzils  vom  Jahre   1524.     Halle. 

1890. 
Bremer,  F.  P.     Franz  von  Sickingen's  Fehde  gegcn  Trier.     Strassburg.     1885. 
Brieger,  Th.     Aleander  und  Luther.     Gotlia.     1884. 
Bruckner,  A.     Zur  Gesch.  des  Keichstags  von  Worms.     Die  Verhaudluugen  iiber  das 

Regiment.     Heidelberg.     18G0. 
Clemen,  0.     Beitrage  zur  Reformationsgeschichte.     Aus  Biichcrn  und  Handschriftcn 

der  Zwickauer  Ratsschulbibliotek.     2  vols.     Berlin.     1901-2. 
Druffel,  A.  von.     Die  Bayrische  Politik  im  Beginne  der  Reformationszeit  1519-24. 

Munich.     1885. 
Frledensburg,  W.    Eine  ungedruckte  Depesche  Aleanders  (Quellen  aus  Italienischen 

Archiv.'Vol.  i,  1897). 

Der   Regensburger   Konveut   von    1524.     In    Hist.  Aufsiitze  dem  Andenken  an 

G.  Waitz  gewidmet.     Hanover.     1886. 

Friedrich,  J.     Der  Reichstag  in  Worms,  1521.     Munich.     1870. 

Gachard,  P.     Corresp.  de  Charles  V  und  Adrien  VI.     Brussels.     1859. 

Gebhardt,  B.     Die  hundert  Gravamina  der  deutschen  Nation.     Breslau.     1884.     2nd 

ed.     1895. 
Haupt,   H.     Beitrage    zur   Reformationsgeschichte    der   Reichsstadt  Worms    1523-4. 

Giessen.     1898. 
Hausrath,  A.     Aleander  und  Luther.     Berlin.     1898. 
Hofler,  C.  A.  C.  von.     Papst  Adrian  VI.     Vienna.     1880. 
Hutten,  Ulrich  von.     Schriften.     Ed.   C.  Bocking.     Leipzig.     1859-fi9.     Cf.  Strauss, 

D.  F.     Ulrich  vou  Hutten.     2  pts.     Leipzig.     1858.     4th  ed.     1878. 
Jorg,  J.  E.     Deutschland  iu  der  Revolutionsepoche  1522-G.     Freiburg.     1851. 
Kalkoff,  Paul.     Die  Depeschen  des  Nuntius  Aleander  vom  Wormser  Reichstag.     2nd 

ed.     Halle.     1897. 

Briefe,  Depeschen,  und  Berichte  iiber  Luther.     Halle.     1898. 

Kawerau,  G.     Luthers  Riickkehr  von  der  Wartburg  nach  Wittenberg.     Halle.     1901. 

Thomas  Murner  uud  die  deutsclie  Reformation.     Halle.     1891. 

Keller,  Ludwig.     Aus  den  Anfangsjahren  der  Reformation.     Monatshefte  d.  Coracnius- 

Gesellschaft,  Berlin,  1899,  pp.  170-85. 
Kolde,  Th.     Friedrich  der  Weise  tnd  die  Anfange  der  Reformation.     Eiiangeu.     1881. 
Kraus,  V.     Das  Nurnberger  Reichsregimeut.     Innsbruck.     1883. 
Meyer,   Chr.      Der  Wiedertaufer  Nikolas   Storch.      Hohenzollerische    Forschungen. 

Berlin,     v,  273-81. 
Mo.ser,  J.  J.     Beitrage  zur  reichsritterschaftlichen  Sachen.     Niirnberg.     1773-4. 
Munch,    E.     Franz   von   Sickingens   Thaten,    Plilne,   Freuudu   und    Au.sgang.     3   pts. 

Stuttgart.     1827-9. 
Pirckhcimer,    Charitas.     Denkwurdigkeiten.     Ed.   C.    A.   C.    von  Hnflcr.     Hamlx-rg. 

1852. 


752  Germany^  1521—55 

Rathgeber,  J.     Thomas  Murner's  Nova  Germania.     Sybel's  Hist.  Zeitschr.     1877,  3. 

Redlich,  O.     Der  Reichstag  von  Niiruberg  1522-3.     Leipzig.     1887. 

Rettberg,  P.     Studieu  zura  Verstandnis  der  Politili  des  Kurfiirst.  Richard  von  Trier 

1519-26.     Greifswald.     1901. 
Richter,  E.  A.     Der  Reichstag  zu  Niirnberg  1524.     Leipzig.     1888. 
Soldan,  F.     Der  Reichstag  zu  Worms  1521.     Worms.     1883. 
Thomas,  G.  M.     Luther  und  die  Reformationsbewegung  in  Deutschland  1520-5.     Ans- 

bach.     1883. 
Tschaliert,  Paul.     Georg  von  Polentz,  Bischof  von  Samland.     Leipzig.     Kircheugesch. 

Studien.     1888. 
Uhlhorn,  J.  G.  W.     Die  Reformation.     Part  ii.     Luther  und  die  Schwarmen.     Hanover. 

1868. 
Uhnann,  H.     Franz  von  Sickingen.     Leipzig.     1872. 
Waltz,  0.     Der  Wormser  Reichstag  im  Jahre  1521.     Forschungen  z.  deutschen  Gesch. 

Vol.  VIII.     Gottingen. 
Weizsacker,  J.     Der  Versnch  eines  Nationallionzils  in  Speier  den  11  Nov.  1524.     Sybel's 

Hist.  Zeitschr.  lxiv. 
Wille,  J.     Die  Uebergabe  des  Herzogthums  Wiirtemberg  an  Karl  V.     Forschungen  zur 

d.  Gesch.     Vol.  xxi. 
Wtilcker,  E.,  and  Virck,  H.     Des  kursachs.  Rathes  Hans  von  Planitz  Berichte  aus  dem 

Reichsregiment  in  Niirnberg  1521-3.    Konigl.  Sachs.  Komm.     Leipzig.     1899. 
Reichstag  und  Reichsregiment  zu  Anfang  der  Reformationszeit.     Preuss.  Hist. 

Jahrb.     1884. 
Wyneken,  C.  F.     Die  Regimentsordnung  von  1521  in  ihrera  Zusammenhange  mit  dem 

Churverein.     Forschungen  zur  d.  Gesch.     Vol.  vni. 


B.     Chapter  VI.     Social  Revolution  and  Catholic  Reaction 

(i)     The  Peasants'  War 

Baumann,  Fr.  L.     Quellen  zur  Gesch.  des  Bauernkrieges  in  Ober-Schwaben.     Stuttgart. 
1877. 

Die  Zwolf  Artilvel  der  oberscliwabischen  Bauern.     Kempten.     1896. 

Akten  zur  Gesch.  des  Bauernkrieges  aus  Oberschwaben.     Freiburg.     1881. 

Bax,  E.  Belfort.     The  Peasants'  War  in  Germany.     London.     1899. 

Beger,  L.     Zur  Gesch.  des  Bauernkriegs  nach  Urkunden  zu  Karlsruhe.     Forschungen 

zur  deutsclien  Gesch.     Vols,  xxi-ir.     Gottingen.     1862-86. 
Bensen,  H.  M.     Gescli.  des  Bauernkrieges  in  Ostf  ranlcen.     Erlangen.     1840. 
Berlichingen,  Gotz  von.    Lebensbeschreibung.     Ed.  Schonhuth.     Heilbronn.     1858. 

Geschichte  von,  by  F.  W.  Berlichingen-Rossach.     Leipzig.     1861. 

Cornelius,  C.  A.     Studien  zur  Geschichte  des  Bauernkrieges.     Munich.     1861. 
Cronthal,  M.     Die  Stadt  Wiirzburg  im  Bauernkriege.     Wiirzburg.     1888. 
Czerny,  A.     Der  erste  Bauernaufstaud  in  Oberosterreich  1525.     Linz.     1882. 
Ehrard,    0.     Der  Bauernkrieg  in  Bamberg.     Beitr.    Bayer.    Kircheugesch.      Vol.   i. 

1896. 
Elben,  A.     Vorderosterreich  in  1524.     Strassburg.     1889. 
Engbert,  S.     Der  Massinger  Bauernliaufe.     Eichstatt.     1895. 

Falckenheimer,  W.     Philipp  der  Grossmiithige  im  Bauernkriege.     Marburg.     1887. 
Fischer,  E.  W.     Ueber  die  sogenannte  Reformation  Kais.  Friedriclis  III.     Hamburg. 

1858. 
Friedrich,  J.     Astrologie   und  Reformation,    oder  die   Astrologen  als  Prediger  der 

Reformation  und  des  Bauernkriegs.     Munich.     1864. 
Friess,  Lorenz.     Geschichte  des  Bauernkrieges  in  Ostfranken.     Wiirzburg.     2  vols. 

1876-83. 


Bibliography  Too 


Gotze,  A.     Die  Artikel  der  Bauern,   1525.    Hist.  Vierteljahrsclirift,   1901,  pp.  1-32- 

1902,  pp.  1-33. 
Haegenmiiller,  J.  B.     Gescliiclite  der  Stadt  Kempten.     2  vols.     Kempten.     1840-7. 
Harer,  P.    Besclireibung  dcs  Bauernlirieges.    Halle.    1881.    (Cf.  P.  Sander  in  Deutsch. 

Zeitschrift  Gesch.  Wiss.     N.  F.     i,  2.) 
Hartfelder,  C.     Bauernkrieg  in  Siidwest  Deutschland.     Stuttgart.     1884. 
Herolt,  J.     Chronik;  in  Geschichtsquellen  der  Stadt  Hall.     Stuttgart.     1894. 
Hoetzsch,    Otto.      Besitzverteilung   und   wirtsch.-soziale   Gliederung    der    liindlichen 

Bevolkerung  im  IG  Jahrh.     Leipziger  Studien.     Vol.  vi.     Part  4. 
Jager,  C.     Gesch.  von  Heilbronn.     2  vols.     Heilbronn.     1828. 

Markgraf  Casirair  und  der  Bauernkrieg.     Nurnberg.     1892. 

Jordan,  R.  Zur  Gesch.  der  Stadt  Miihlhausen  in  1523-5.  Muhlhausen.  1901. 
Jorg,  J.  E.  Deutschland  in  der  Revolutionsperiode  1522-6.  Freiburg.  1851. 
Kautsky,  Carl.     Communism  in  Central  Europe  in  the  time  of  the  Reformation.    Engl. 

trans.     London.     1897. 
Kluckhohn,  A.     Ueber  das  Projekt  eines  Bauernparlamentes  zu  Heilbronn.     Nachricht. 

von  d.  Gesellsch.  der  Wissensch.  zu  Gottingen.     No.  7.     1893. 
Lamprecht,  K.      Die  Entwickelung  des    rheinischen  Bauernstandes.     Westdeutsche 

Zeitschr.  fiir  Gesch.     Vol.  vi. 
Lehnert,  K.  F.     Studien  zur  Gesch.  der  Zvvolf  Artikel  vom  Jahre  1525.     Halle.     1894. 
Leist,  F.     Quellenbeitrage  zur  Gesch.    des  Bauernaufruhrs   in   Salzburg.     Salzburg. 

1888. 
Lenz,  M.     Zur  Schlacht  bei  Frankenhausen.     Hist.  Zeitschrift.     lxix. 
Leodius,  H.  T.     Der  Bauernkrieg.     In  Freher's  Scriptores.     Vol.  iii.  pp.  239  sqq. 
Loserth,  J.     Die  Stadt  Waldshut  und  die  vorderosterreichische  Regierung  in  1523-6. 

Vienna.     1891. 
Lucke,  W.     Die  Entstehuug  der  "  15  Bundesgenossen  "  des  Joh.  Eberlin  von  Giinzburg. 

Halle.     1902. 
Marquard,  M.     Kempten  und  der  Bauernkrieg.     Allgauer  Geschichtsfreund.  xiii.  1-22, 

37-45. 
Muck,  Georg.     Geschichte  von  Kloster  Heilsbronn.     3  vols.     Nordlingen.     1879-80. 
Miiller,  L.     Beitrage  zur  Gesch.  des  Bauernkrieges.     Zeitschr.  des  hist.  Vereins  fur 

Schwaben  und  Neuburg.     Augsburg.     1889-91. 
Miinzer,  Thomas.     Aussgetriickte  Emplossung  des  falschen  Glaubens.     Miihlhausen. 

1524.     Ed.  R.  Jordan.     Muhlhausen.     1901. 

Lives  of,  by  0.  Merx  (includes  also  Heinrich  Pfeiffer),  Gottingen,  1889;  G.  Th. 

Strobel,  Niirnberg,  1795,  and  J.  K.  Seidemann,  Dresden,  1842. 

Nabholz,  A.     Bauernbewegung  in  d.  Ost-Schweiz  1524-5.     Zurich.     189G. 

Neumann,  R.     Zur  Gesch.  des  Bauernkrieges.     Fi'ankfort.     1882. 

Oechsle,  E.  F.     Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  dcs  Bauernkrieges  in  den  Schwiibisch-Friinki- 

schen  Gegenden.     Heilbronn.     1844. 
Prossl,  J.     Die  Beschwerden  d.  bischofl.  Bambergischen  Unterthanen  im  Bauernkricge. 

Munich.     1901. 
Rabenlechner,  M.  M.     Der  Bauernkrieg  in  Steiermark.     Freiburg.     1901. 
Radlkofer,  M.     Entstehungsgeschichte  und  Antorschaft  der  Zwcilf  Artikeln.  Zeitschr. 

fur  d.  h.  Verein  fiir  Schwaben.     Vol.  xvi.     1889. 
John  Eberlin  von  Giinzburg  und  Hans  Jakob  Wclhc  von  Leiphcim.     Nordlingen. 

1887. 
Reiser,   F.     Reformation   des  K.  Sigismund.     1876.     (Cf.    H.  Werner  in  Hist.  Vier- 

teljschr.  v,  4G7-86,  and  C.  Koehno  in  N.  Archiv.     Vol.  xxiii.) 
Renouard  de  Bussiere.     Hist,  de  la  guerre  des  paysans.     Paris.     2  vols.     1862. 
Riezler,   S.     In  Sitzungsberichte  der  Miinchener  Akademie,  Hist.    Classc,  1891,   pp. 

708  sqq. 
Riggenbach,  B.     Johann  Eberlin  von  Gunzlmrg.     Tiibmgen.     18<4. 
Ryhiner,  H.     Chronik  des  Bauernkrieges.     Basler  Ciironikcn,  vi,  461-504.     1902. 
Sander,  H.     Vorarlberg   zur  Zeit  des  deutschen  Bauernkrieges.     Miihlbacher's  Mlt- 

theilungen.     iv.     Innsbruck.     1880  etc. 

48 


754:  Germany,  1521-55 


Schmidt,  J.  H.  Die  "15  Bundesgeaosseii "  d.  Joli.  Eberlin  von  Giinzburg.  Leipzig. 
1900. 

Schrechenbach,  P.  F.     Luther  und  der  Bauernkvieg.     Oldenburg.     1895. 

Schreiber,  H.     Der  deutsche  Bauernla-ieg.     3  vols.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1863-6. 

Sepp,  J.  N.     Der  bayerische  Bauenikrieg.     Munich.     188-1. 

Steitz,  G.  E.  Dr  Gerhard  Westerburg,  der  Leiter  des  Biirgeraufstaudes  zu  Frank- 
furt in  1525.     Archiv  fiir  Frankfurts  Gesch.     N.  F.     v,  192  sqq. 

Stern,  A.     Ueber  die  Zwolf  Artikel  der  Bauern.     Leipzig.     18G8. 

Eegesten  zur  Gesch.  des  Bauernkrieges  vornehralich  in  der  Pfalz.     Zeitschr.  fiir 

Gesch.  des  Oberrheins.     Vol.  xxiii.     Karlsruhe.     1870. 

Stolze,    W.      Zur   Vorgesch.    des    Bauernkrieges.     Staats-    und    Socialwissenschaft. 

Forschungen.     Vol.  xviii.     Pt  iv.     Leipzig.     1900. 
Thomas,  Max.     Markgraf  Kasimir  im  Bauernkriege.     Breslau.     1898.     Gotha.     1900. 
Vogt.  W.     Die  Vorgeschichte  des  Bauernkrieges.     Halle.     1887. 

Die  bayrische   Politik    ira  Bauernkriege.     Nordlingen.     1883.     [Chiefly  against 

J  org.] 

Die  Korrespondenz  des  SchwabischenBundes-Hauptmanns  1524-7.  4  pts.  Augs- 
burg.    1879-83. 

Wachsmuth,  W.     Der  deutsche  Bauernkrieg.    Leipzig.     1834. 

Waldau,    G.    E.     Materialien  zur    Gesch.    des    Bauernkrieges.       3    pts.      Chemnitz. 

1791-4. 
Zimmermann,  W.     Allgemeine  Gesch.  des  Grossen  Bauernkrieges.     3  vols.     Stuttgart. 

1841-3.     2nd  ed.     1856. 
Zopfl,  H.     Die  Hauptmannschaft  des  Gotz  von  Berlichingen.     Heidelberg.     1850. 


(ii)     Plot  and  counterplot  from  1525  to  1529 

Balan,  P.    dementis  VII  epistolae.    (Vol.  i  of  Monumenta  saecuii  xvi  hist,  illustrantia. 

Innsbruck.     1885.) 
Beclagung  Teutscher  nation  iiber  die  umbillichen  beschwerd  und  bezwingknuss  des 

Romischen  stills,     s.  1.     1526. 
Casanova,  E.     Lettere  di  Carlo  V  a  Clemente  VII  1527-33.     Florence.     1893. 
Ehsess,  S.     Gesch.  der  Pack'schen  Handel.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1881. 

Landgraf  Philipp  von  Hessen  und  Otto  von  Pack.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1886. 

Friedeusburg,  W.     Der  Reichstag  zu  Speier  in  1526.     Jastrow's  Hist.  Untersuchungen. 

Pt  V.     Berlin.     1887. 

Zur  Vorgesch.  des  Gotha-Torgauischen  Biindnisses.     Marburg.     1884. 

Beitrage  zuni  Briefwechsel  zwischen  Herzog  Georg  von  Sachsen  und  Land- 
graf Philipp  von  Hessen.  Neues  Archiv  fiir  Sachs.  Gesch.  Dresden.  1880  etc. 
Bd  VI. 

Grethen,  R.  Die  politischen  Beziehungen  Clemens  VII  zu  Karl  V  1523-7.  Hanover. 
1887. 

Hellwig,  W.  Die  politischen  Beziehungen  Clemens  VII  zu  Karl  V  im  Jahre  1526. 
Leipzig.    1889. 

Joachim,  E.  Die  Politik  des  letzten  Hochmeisters  in  Preussen,  Albrecht  von  Branden- 
burg.    Berlin.     1892. 

Karsteus,  W.     Siichsisch-Hessische  Beziehungen  in  1524-6.     Kiel.     1886. 

Kluckhohn,  A.  Der  Reichstag  zu  Speier  ira  J.  1526.  Sybel's  Hist.  Zeitsch.  Munich. 
1859  etc.     Vol.  lvi. 

Ney,  J.  Analekten  zur  Gesch.  des  Reichstags  zu  Speier  im  J.  1526.  Zeitschr.  fiir 
Kirchengesch.  viii,  ix,  xii.     Hamburg.     1888. 

Schomburgk,  W.  Die  Pack'schen  Handel.  Maurenbrecher's  Hist.  Taschenbuch. 
Leipzig.     1882. 

Schornbaum,  K.     Stelluug  d.  Markgraf  Kasimir,  1524-7.     Erlangeu.     1901. 


Bibllofjraphy 


7  of) 


Schornbaum.  K.     Markgraf    Georg  uml  d.  Sachsistli-Hessische   BUuduissbestrebung 

voa  1528.     Beitr.  znr  bayer.  Kirchengescli.  viii  193-212. 
Sclmarz,  n.     Landgraf  Philipp  und  die  rack'schen  Handel.     Leipzig.     1881.     (Cf.  W. 

Schomburgk  iu  Maurenbrecher's  Tasclienbucli.     1882.) 
Stoy,  St.     Erste  Rundnisbestrebungen  evangelischer  Stiinde.     Jena.     1888. 
Virck,  H.     Die  Stiidte  und  das  Bundniss  der  evangelischen  Fursten  152C-7.     Weimar 

1887. 
Vou  der  Lith,  J.  W.     ErliLuterung  der  Keforraatiou  vou  1524  bis  1528.     Schwabach. 

1733. 

(iii)      The  organisation  of  Lulheran  Churches 

Berlit,  G.     Luther,  Murner,  und  d.  Kirchenlied  des  16  Jahrli.     Leipzig.     1899. 
Bugenhagen,    J.      Kircheuorduungeu  fiir    die   Stadt   Braunschweig.      Wolfenbuttel. 

1885. 
Burkhardt,  C.  A.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Kirchen-  und  Schuhi-sitationen  im  Zeit- 

alter  der  Reformation.     Leipzig.     1879  etc. 
Cohrs,  F.     Evangel.  Katechismusversuche  vor  Luthers  Enchiridion.     4  vols.     Berlin. 

1900-1902.     (Cf.  Beitrage  zur  bayer.  Kirchengescluchte  viii  237-9.) 
Fricke,  F.     Luthers  kleiner  Katechismus.     Giittingen.     1897. 
Friedrich,  G.     Luther  und  die  Kirchenverfassung.     Darmstadt.     1894. 
Hartmann,  Julius.     Aelteste  katechetische  Denkmale  der  Ev.  Kirche,  odcr  die  kleinen 

Katechismen   von   Brenz,  Althammer,   Lachmann,  und   Luther   aus   den   Jahren 

1527-9.     Stuttgart.     1844. 
Hase,  C.  A.     Herzog  Albrecht  von  Preussen  und  sein  Hofprediger  [J.  Funck].     Leip- 
zig.    1879. 
Kiistner,  A.     Die  Kinderfragen.     Der  erste  deutsche  Katechismus.     Leipzig.     1902. 
Lambert,    Francois.      Lives   of,   by   Baum  (Strassburg,    1840),  F.  W.      Hassencamp 

(Elberfeld,  1800),  Stieve  (Breslau,  18G7)  and  Louis  Bullet  (Paris,  1873). 
Planck,    G.    J.      Geschichte   der   Entstehung,    der   Veriinderungen   und   der   Bildung 

unseres  Protestantischen  Lehrbcgriffs.     6  vols.     Leipzig.     1781-1800. 
Richter,  A.  L.     Die  evangel.  Kirchenordnungen  des  16  Jahrh.    2  vols.    Weimar.    1846. 
Sehling,  E.     Die  evangelischen  Kirchenordnungen  des  16  Jahrh.     Leipzig.     1902. 


(iv)      The  Protest  of  1529 

Jung,  A.     Geschichte  des  Reichstags  zu  Speier  in  1529.     Strassburg.     1830. 
Miiller,  J.  J.     Hist,  von  der  evangel.  Stiinde  Protestation  und  Apellalion.    Jena.    1705. 
Ney,  J.     Geschichte  des  Reichstages  zu  Speier  in  1529.     Hamburg.     1880. 
Tittmann,  J.  A.  H.     Die  Protestation  zu  Speyer.     Leipzig.     1829. 


C.     Cii-xPTEn  VIL     TiiK  Conflict  of  Crkkus  axi>  Partiks 

(i)      2'Ae  Conference  at  Marhurg  and  Confession  of  Augshunj 

Bess,  B.     Luther  in  ^Larburg  1529  (Preuss.  Jahrb.  civ  418-31,  Berlin.  1001). 
Bresch,  F.     Strasbourg  et  la  querelle  sacramentaire.     Monlauban.     I'.i02. 
Brieger,  Th.     Beitrage  zur  Gesch.  des  Augsburg.  Reichstages   1530.      Zeitschr.  flir 
^^Kircheng.  xii.     1891. 

Die  Torgauer  Artikel.     In  Kirchengeschichtliche  Studien.     Leipzig.     1888. 

Bucer,  M.     Historische  Nachricht  von  dem  Gcspdich  zu  Marburg.     Simlcr,  Sainmlung 

11,  ii,  471  sqq.  .      . 

Calinich,  H.  J.  R.     Luther  und  die  Augsburgische  Confession.     Loip/.ig.     W>\. 


756  Germany,  1521-55 

Ericlison,  A.     Das  Marburger  Religionsgespriich.     Strassburg.     1880. 

Escher,  H.    Die  Glaubensparteien  in  der  Eidgenossenschaft  und  ilire  Bezieliungen  zu 

den  deutschen  Protestanten  1527-31.     Frauenfeld.     1882. 
Facius,  Moriz.     Gesch.  des  Reichstages  zu  Augsburg.     Leipzig.     1830.     (Cf.  books  on 

the  same  subject  publislied  the  same  year  by  C.  Fikenscher  and  C.  Pfaff.) 
Ficker,  J.     Die  Konfutation  des  Augsburg.  Bekenntnisses.     Leipzig.     1891. 

Das  Konstanzer  Bekenntniss.     Tubingen.     1902. 

Aktenstucke  zu  den  Religionsverhandlungen  des  Reichstages   zu   Regensburg, 

1532.     Zeitschr.  fur  K.  Gesch.  xii. 

Forstemann,  K.  E.     Urkundenbuch  zu  der  Gesch.  des  Reichstags  zu  Augsburg.    2  vols. 

Halle.     1833-5. 
Greiner.      Briefwechsel  Konrad  Mocks  .  .  .  auf  dem  Reichstag   zu  Augsburg   1530. 

Wiirttemb.  A^ierteljh.  vi.  52-107,  vii.  50-88. 
Jaeger,  C.      Die  Augsb.  Konfession  der  vier  Stadte.      Els.-Lothr.    Protestantischer 

liberaler  Verein.     No.  xiv.     1880. 
Knaake,  J.  K.  F.     Luthers  Anteil  an  der  Augsburgischen  Confession.     Berlin.     1863. 
Kolde,   Th.      Niirnberg  und   Luther  vor  dem   Reichstag   zu   Augsburg.      Kircheng. 

Studien.     Leipzig.     1888. 
Loaysa,  G.  de.     Cartas  al  Carlos  V  1530-2.     Ed.  G.  Heine.    Berlin.     1848. 
Loscher,  V.  E.     Historia  Motuum.     Leipzig.     1770. 

Meyer,  C.     La  refutation  de  la  confession  dAugsbourg.     Alengon.     1896. 
Morikofer,  J.  C.     Ulrich  Zwiugli  nach  den  urkundlichen  Quellen.      2  pts.     Leipzig. 

1867-9. 
Miiller,  E.  F.  K.     Die  Bekenntnisschriften  d.  reform.  Kirche.     Leipzig.     1902. 
Paetzold,  A.     Die  Konfutation  des  Vierstadtebekenntnisses.     Leipzig.     1899. 
Popowski,  F.  von.     Kritik  der  handschriftlichen  Sammlung  des  Joh.  Faber  zu  der 

Gesch.  des  Augsburg.  Reichstags  in  1530.     Konigsberg.     1880. 
Riickert,  L.  J.     Luthers  Verhiiltnis  zum  Augsburgischen  Bekenntniss.     Jena.     1854. 
Salig,  C.  A.     Vollstandige  Hist,  der  Augsburg.  Confession.     4  pts.     Halle.     1730-45. 
Schirrmacher,  F.  W.      Briefe  und  Akten  zu  der  Gesch.  des  Religionsgespraches  zu 

Marburg  und  des  Reichstages  zu  Augsburg.     Gotha.     1876. 
Tschakert,  P.     Die  Augsburgische  Konfession.    Leipzig.     1901. 

Die   bisher  unbekannte   Ulmer   Handschrift  der  Augsb.   Konfession.      Theol. 

Studien  und  Kritiken,  1903,  pp.  48-70. 

Uhlhorn,  J.  G.  W.     Die  Reformation.     Luther  und  die  Schweizer.     Hanover.     1868. 
Virck,  H.     Melanchthons  politische  Stellung  auf  dem  Reichstage  zu  Augsburg  1530. 
Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirchengeschichte.     Vol.  ix.     1887. 


(ii)     The  Schmalkaldic  League 

Meurer,  M.     Der  Tag  zu  Schmalkalden  und  die  Schmalkaldischen  Artikeln.     Leipzig. 

1837. 
Pfender,  P.     Les  articles  de  Smalkalde.    Paris.     1899. 
Schmidt,  G.     Zur  Geschichte  des  Schmalk.  Bundes.  Forsch.  zur  Deutschen   Gesch. 

Vol.  XXV. 
Singer,  P.    Beziehung  des  Schmalkald.  Bundes  zu  England.     Greifswald.     1901. 
Winckelraann,  O.     Der  Schmalkaldische  Bund  1530-2  und  der  Niirnberger  Religions- 

friede.     Strassburg.     1892. 
Zangemeister,  K.     Die  Schmalkaldischen  Artikel  vom  Jahre  1537.     Heidelberg.     1883. 


(iii)     The  Wurttemberg  Far  o/ 1534 

Heyd,  L.  F.     Die  Schlacht  bei  Laufen.     Stuttgart.     1834. 

Wille,  J.     Philipp  der  Grossmiitige  von  Hessen  und  die  Restitution  Ulrichs  von  Wiir- 
temberg  1526-35,     Tubingen.     1882. 


BlhJio(jrap]ty 


<•>< 


Wille,  J.  Analekten  zur  Gesch.  Oberdeutschlauds  insbesoiidere  WiirtcinberKS  1534-40, 
Zeitschr.  ftir  Gesch.  des  Oberrheins.     Karlsruhe.     1858-G8.     Vol.  xxxvii. 

Winckelmann,  O.  Die  Vertrage  von  Kadaii  uud  Wieu.  Brioger's  Zeitschr.  fur 
Kirchengesch.  xi,  212  sqq. 


(iv)     'Hie  Anabaptists 

Bax,  E.  Belfort.     Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Anabaptists.     Loudon.     1903. 

Beck,  Josef.     Die  Geschichtsbiicher  der  Wiedertaufer  in  Oesterreich-Ungarn.    Pontes 

Rer.  Austr.     "Vol.  xliii. 
BuUinger,    H.       Der    Wiedertauferen    Ursprung,    Furgang,    Secten,    etc.       Zurich. 

1560. 
-Burckhardt,  P.     Die  Easier  Tiiufer.     Basel.     181)8. 
Cornelius,  C.  A.     Berichte  der  Augenzeugeu  iiber  das  Wiedertiiuferreich.     Miinster. 

1853. 

Geschichte  des  Munsterischen  Aufruhrs.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1855-00. 

Die  Niederlandischen  Wiedertaufer  wahrend  der  Belageruiig  Munsters.    Munich. 

1869. 

Historische  Arbeiten.     Leipzig.     1899. 

Die  Eroberung  der  Stadt  Miinster.     Von  Raumer's  Taschenbuch,  1872. 

Detmer,  H.     Bilder  an  der  relig.  und  sozial.  Unruhen  in  Miinster.     Miinster.     1902. 
Egli,  E.     Die  Ziiricher  Wiedertiiufer.     Zurich.     1878. 

Die  St  Galler  Tiiufer.     Zurich.     1887. 

Gresbeck,    H.      In  Geschichtsquellen  des   Bisthuras    Miinster.      Vol.    ii.      Miinster. 

1852. 
Hase,  C.  A.     Das  Reich  der  Wiedertaufer.     Leipzig.     1860. 
Heath,  R.     Anabaptism  1521-3G.     London.     1895. 

Heresbach,  Conrad.     Historia  anabaptistica.     Ed.  Bouterwek.     Elberfeld.     1866. 
Hoflfmann,  Melchior.     Propliecey  oder  weissagung  aus  heliger  schrifft.     Basel.     1530? 
Hoffmeister,  Johanu.     Dicta  Memorabilia.     Cologne.     1543. 
Jochmus,  H.     Geschichte  der  Kirchenref.  zu  Miinster  und  ihres  Untergangs  durch  die 

Wiedtaufer.     Miinster.     1825. 
Keller,   L.     Geschichte   der   Wiedertaufer   und    ihres   Reichs   zu  Miinster.     Miinster. 

1880. 

Die   Wiederherstellung   der  Kathol.    Kirche    nach    dem   Wiedertiiuferuiiruhen. 

Sj'bel's  Hist.  Zeitschr.  xlvii  429  sqq. 

Hans  Denks  Protestation  und  Bekenntniss.     Monatschr.  d.  Conien.-Gcscllsch. 

VII  231-43. 

Ein  Apostel   der  Wiedertaufer  [Hans   Denck].     Preuss.  Jahrbiichcr.     Septem- 
ber, 1882. 

Kerssenbroch,   Herman.     Anabaptistici  Furoris  .  .  .  hist,  narratio.     Ed.  H.   Detmer. 

Miinster.     1899.     (Cf.   Detmer,  Kerssenbroch's  Leben  und  Schriften.     Miinster. 

1900.) 
Kirchmair,  Georg.     Dcnkwiirdigkeiten  seiner  Zeit  1519-53.     Part  i.     In  Fontcs  Rcr. 

Austriacarum,  i  417-534. 

Das  BJiptische  Reich.     Wiirtemberg  (?).     1563. 

Kolde,  Th.     Zum  Prozess  des  Johann  Denk.     Leipzig.     Kirchengesch.  StudiPn.      1888. 

Kripp,  J.  von.     Ein  Beitrag  zur  Gesch.  der  Wiedertaufer  in  Tyrol. 

Krohn,  B.  N.     Geschichte  dor  Wiedertiiufer.     Leipzig.     1758. 

Linden.   F.    0.    zur.      Melchior   Iloft'mann,   ein  Prophet   der    Wiedertiiufer.     Leipzig. 

1885. 
Melanchthon,  P.     Unterricht  wider   der   Lere  der  Wiederteulfer  vertentschtot  durch 

Justus  Jonas.     AVittenberg.     1528. 

Etliche  Prnpositiones  wider  der  Lehre  der  Widerteuffor.     Wittenberg.      1535. 

Menius,  Justus.     Von  dem  Geist  der   WidertcufTer.     Wittenberg.     1544. 
Neue  Zeitung  von  den  Wiedertiluft'eren  und  iliror  Sect.     Strassburg  (?).     1528. 


758  Germany,  1521-55 


Ottius,  J.  H.     Annales  Anabaptistici.     Basel.     1572. 

Rembert,  K.     Die  Wiedertaufer  im  Herzogtum  Jiilich.     Berlin.     1899. 

Kenouard  de  Bussiere,  M.  T.  Les  Anabaptistes.  Hist,  du  Lutherauisrae,  de  I'Anabap- 
tisme  et  du  regne  de  Jeau  Bockelsohu  a  Miinster.     Paris.     1853. 

Rhegius,  Urbanus.  Disputation  .  .  .  -wider  alle  Chiliasten.  Ed.  C.  J.  H.  Fick.  Her- 
maansburg.     1860. 

Koth,  Fr.  Zur  Geschichte  der  Wiedertaufer  in  Oberschwaben.  Zeitschr.  d.  Vereins 
fiir  Schwaben,  Vols,  xxvii-viii,  1901-2. 

Rothmauu,  Bernard.  Schriften.  Ed.  E.  W.  H.  Hochliuth.  Gotlia.  1857.  (Cf.  H. 
Detmer,  Beitrage  ziir  Gesch.  Bernhard  Rothmanns  in  Monatsbll.  d.  Comenius- 
Gesells.  ix,  273-300,  1901.) 

Tumbiilt.  G.  Die  Wiedertaufer;  die  sozial.  und  relig.  Bewegungen  zur  Zeit der  Refor- 
mation.    Leipzig.     1899. 

Winter,  V.  A.     Geschichte  der  Bairischen  Wiedertaufer.     Munich.     1809. 

{See  also  numerous  articles  in  the  Monatshefte  d.  Comeuius-Gesellschaft.) 


(v)     Lllbeck  and  the  ^^  Graf enf elide" 

Alten,  F.  von.      Graf  Christoph  von  Oldenburg  und  die   Grafenfehde.      Hamburg. 

1853. 
Faulstitch,  E.     Zur  Geschichte  Stralsunds  in  der  Zeit  der  Grafenfehde.     Stralsund. 

1902. 
Gloy,  A.     Beitr.  zur  Gesch.  der  Leibeigenschaft  in  Holstein.     Kiel.     1901. 
Handelmann,  H.     Die  letzten  Zeiten  der  Hansischen  Uebermacht.     Kiel.     1853. 
Koppmann,  K.     Zur  Geschichte   Dr  Joh.  Oldendorps.     Beitr.    zur  Gesch.   der  Stadt 

Rostock,  Vol.  III. 
Schafer,  Dietrich.     Geschichte  von  Danemark.     Vol.  iv.     Gotha.     1893. 
Schlozer,  K.  von.     Verfall  und  Untergang  der  Hansa.     Berlin.      1853. 
Waitz,  G.     Liibeck  unter  Jiirgen  V/uUenweber  und  die  Europiiische  Politik.     Berlin. 

3  vols.     1855-6. 
Wurm,  C.   F.     Die  politischen  Beziehungen  Heinrichs  VIII  zu  Marcus  Meyer  und 

Jiirgen  WuUenwever.     Hamburg.     1852. 


(vi)     Lutherans  and  Catholics,  1535-44 

Blatter,   A.      Thatigkeit    Melanchthons    bei    deu    Unionsversuchen    1539-41.      Bern. 

1899. 
Brandenburg,  Erich.     Herzog  Heinrich  der  Fromme  von  Sachsen  1537-41.     Dresden. 

1896. 

Polit.  Korrespondenz  Moritz  von  Sachsen.     Vol.  i,  to  1543.     Leipzig.     1900. 

Brieger,  Th.  G.     Gasparo  Contarini  und  das  Regensburger  Konkordienwerk  d.  J.  1541. 

Gotha.     1870. 
Bucer,  M.*    Dialogi  oder  Gesprech  von  der  gemainsame  und  den  Kirchenlibungen  der 

Christen.     Augsburg.     1535. 
Dittrich,  F.     Nuntiaturbericht  Morones  1539-40.     Paderborn.     1892. 

Gasparo  Contarini.     Braunsberg.     1885. 

Regesten  und  Briefe  des  Kardinals  G.  Contarini.     Braunsberg.     1881. 

Druffel,  A.  von.     Ueber  den  Vei-trag  zwischen  Karl  V  und  dem  Papst  von  Juni  1541. 

Deutsche  Zeitsch.  fiir  Gesch.     Vol.  in.     1889. 
Ettenius,    Cornelius.      Berichte  iiber   die   Reise  des  Legaten  Vorstius  1536-7.     Ed. 

Arendt.     Raumer's  Hist.  Taschenbuch,  1839. 
Franstadt,  A.     Die  Einfiihrung  der  Ref.  im  Hochstifte  Merseburg.     Leipzig.     1843. 


Bibliofjraphy  759 


Frieclensburg,  W.     Zur  Gcsch.  des  Wonnsor  Kuuvcnts  1541.     Zcitschr.  fiir  Kircheii- 

Gesch.     Vols,  xxi-ii,  1900-1. 
Nuntiaturberichte  aus  Deutschlaiul ;  published   Ijy  the  K.  Pruuss.  hist.  Institut 

lu  Home  i  i  1892  (Despatches  of  Veriierio   1533-G);  i  ii   1898   (Despatches   of 

Morone  153G-8)  ;  i  iii-iv  1893  (Despatches  of  Aleander  1538-9). 
Gachard,L.  P.     Trois  Aunees  de  Charlcs-Qirint  1543-G.     Brussels.     1805. 
Heide,  G.     Die  Veihandhingeu  des  Vizekanzlers  Held  1537-8.     Hist.-Polit.  IJliittcr  fiir 

d.  kathol.  Deutschlaiul.     Vol.  cii.     Munich. 
Heppe,  H.     Urkuudliche  Beitrage  zurGesch.  dei-  Doppelehe  des  Laudgrafs.     Nicducr's 

Zeitschr.  xxii,  265  sqq. 
Hoffmann,  E.     Kauniburg  im  Zeitalter  der  Keformation.      Lelpziger  Sludien.      Vol. 

vii,  Part  I,  1901.     (Cf.  F.  Koster,  Beitrage  in  Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirchen-Gesch.     x.\ii, 

145-59,  278-330.) 
Kayser,   C.      Die   reformatorischen   Kirchenvisitationera   in    den    welflschen   1-anden 

1542-4.     Gottingen.     1897. 
Koldewey,  F.     Heinz  von  Wolfenblittel.     Halle.     1883. 
Meinardus,    O.      Die    Verhaudluugen   des    Schni.    Bundes   von   14  bis    18   Feb.   1539. 

Forschungen  zur  deutschen  Geschichte.     Gottingen.     Vol.  xxii. 
Meine,  F.     Die  Stellung  Joachims  II.     Liineljurg.     1898. 
Moses,   R.     Die  lleligiousverhandlungen  in  Hagenau    und    Worms,    1540-1.     Jena. 

1889. 
Pastor,  L.    Correspondenz  Contarinis,  1541.     Hist.  Jahrbuch,  1880. 
Schulte,  F.  X.     Luther  und  die  Doppelehe  des  Landgrafen  von  Hessen.     Padcrborn. 

18U9. 
Schwarz,  K.     Ilomische  Beitrage  zu  J.  Groppers  Leben  und  Wirken.     Hist.  Jahrbuch 

der  Gorresgesellsch.     Vol.  vii. 
Spiess,    P.   E.     Gesch.    des  kaiscrlicli.  neunjiihrig.  Bundes   von    1535-44.      Erlangen. 

1788. 
Traut,  H.     Kurftirst  Joachim  II  von  Brandenburg  und  der  Tiirkenfeldzug  vom  Jahre 

1542.     Gummersbach.     1892. 
Vetter,  P.     Die  lieligionsverhandluugen  auf  dem  Keichstage  zu  Regensburg.     Jena. 

1899. 
Weiss,  C.     Papiers  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle.     4  vols.     Paris.     1841-3.     (Cf.  Corre- 

spondance  du  Cardinal  dc  Granvelle.     Brussels.     1897.) 


(vii)     The  Cleves  War 

Crecelius,   W.     Der  geldrische  Erbfolgestreit   1538-43.      Zcitschr.    des    Bergischen 

Geschichtsvereins.     Bonn.     1803  etc.     Vol.  xxiii. 
Heidrich,  Paul.     Der  geldrische  Erbfolgestreit  1537-43.     Cassel.     1895. 


D.     CiiAPTRU  VIII.    Religious  War 
(i)     Authorities  for  the  whole  or  the  (/renter  part  of  chapter 

Brandenburg,  E.     Moritz  von  Sachsen.     Vol.  i.    Leipzig.    1898  ^,^:,,„,„  :    r, 

Braunsberger,  O.  B.     Petri  Canisii  epistolae  ct  acta.     Vol.  i,  1541-56.     Frcibuig  i.  B. 

Brunner,^'  S.      Korrespondenzen  .  .   .  Ferdinands   I    in   kirchlichen    Angelogenhcltcn 
1546-59.     Studien  .  .  .  aus  den  Benodictiner  und  Cisterciensor  Orden.     \ol.  >• 


760  Germany,  1521-55 

Calendar  of  State  Papers.     Foreign  Series,  1547-53.    London.     1861. 

Cornelius,  C.  A.  Zur  Erlauteruug  d.  Politik  d.  Churf.  Moritz  von  Sachsen.  Miinch- 
ener  Histor.  Jahrbuch.     Munich.     186G. 

Dreytwein,  Dion.     Esslingische  Chronik  1548-64.     Ed.  A.  Diehl.    Tubingen.     1901. 

Druffel,  A.  von.  Briefe  und  Akten  zur  Gesch.  d.  xvi  Jahrh.  1546-55.  Vols,  i-iv, 
1873-96.     Vol.  v.     Ed.  W.  Goetz.     1898. 

Haberlin,  F.  D.  Neueste  Deutsche  Reichsgeschichte  vom  Anfang  des  Schmalk. 
Krieges.     28  vols.     Halle.     1774  etc. 

Haussleiter,  J.  Aus  der  Schule  Melanchthons.  Theologische  Disputationen  zu  Wit- 
tenberg 1546-60.     Greifswald.     1897. 

Hortleder,  Fr.  Der  romischen  Keyser  .  .  .  Handlungen  und  Ausschreiben  .  .  .  von 
den  Ursachen  des  teutschen  Krieges  ...  2  pts.  Frankfurt.  1617-8.  (Cf.  M. 
Ritter  in  N.  Ai-chiv  fiir  Sachs.  Gesch.     Dresden.     1880.     Vol.  i.) 

Issleib,  S.     Moritz  von  Sachsen  als  pvotestantischer  Fiirst.     Hamburg.     1898. 

Langenn,  F.  A.  von.     Melchior  von  Ossa.     Leipzig.     1858. 

Christoph  von  Carlowitz.     Leipzig.     1854. 

Moritz  von  Sachsen.     2  vols.    Leipzig.     1841. 

Massarelli,  A.     Tagebuch  vom  Coucil  zu  Trient.     Ed.  DoUinger.     Vol.  i.     Nordlingen. 

1876. 
Maurenbrecher,  W.     Karl  V  und    die  deutschen  Protestanten   1545-55.     Dusseldorf. 

1865. 

Kurftirst  Moritz  von  Sachsen.     Studien  u.  Skizzen  z.  Gesch.  d.  Reformationzeit. 

Leipzig.     1874. 

Pieper.    A.     Papstliche  Legaten   und  Nuntien  in  Deutschland  .  .  .     Part  i,  1550-9. 

Muuster.     1897. 
Reichenberger,   R.     Wolfgang  von  Salm,  Bischof  von  Passau  1540-1555.     Freiburg. 

1902. 
Ribier,  G.     Lettres  et  Memoires  d'Estat.     Paris.     1666.     2  vols. 
Sastrow,    Bartholomew.      Memoirs.      Ed.    Mohnike,    3    vols.,    Greifswald,    1823-4; 

abridged  translation  published  as  Social  Germany  in  Luther's  Time.    London. 

1902. 
Sehling,    E.     Die  Kirchengesetzgebung  unter  Moritz  von   Sachsen  und  Georg  von 

Anhalt.     Leipzig.     1899.     (Cf.  E.  Brandenburg  in  Hist.  Vierteljahrschr.     1901, 

pp.  195-237.) 
Sturm,  Jakob.     Life  of,  by  Baumgarten.     Strassburg.     1876. 
Sturm,  John.     La  vie  et  travaux,  by  Ch.  Schmidt.     Strassburg.     1855. 
Trent,  Council  of.     Monumenta  Tridentina.     Ed.  Druffel.    Vol.  i.     Munich.     1899. 

Diariorum,  Actorum,  Epistt.,  Tractatuum  nova  coUectio.    Ed.  Merkle.     Gorres- 

gesellschaft.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1901. 

Turba,  G.     Beitrage  zur  Gesch.  der  Habsburger  1548-1558  (reprinted  from  the  Archiv 

fiir  Oester.  Gesch.  xc).     Vienna.     1901. 
Voigt,  G.     Moritz  von  Sachsen,  1541-7.     Leipzig.     1876. 

Weiss,  Ch.    Papiers  d'Etat  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle.     9  vols.    Paris.     1841-52. 
Wolf,  Gustav.     Deutsche  Gesch.  im  Zeitalter  der  Gegenreformation.     Vol.  i.    Berlin. 

1898-9. 


(ii)     The  Prelude  to  War  1544-6 

Brandenburg,  E.      Die  Gefangennahme  Herzog  Heinrichs  durch  d.  Schmalk.  Bund. 

Leipzig.     1894. 
Regensburger  Vertrag  zwischen  d.  Habsburgern  und  Moritz.     Hist.  Zeitschr. 

Lxxx,  1-42. 
Bruns,  F.    Vertreibung  Heinrichs  von  Braunschweig.     Marburg.     1889. 
Caemmerer,  H.  von.     Das  Regensburger  Religionsgesprach  im  Jahre  1546.    Berlin. 

1901. 


Bibliography  761 


Drouven,  G.     Die  Ref.  in  d.  Colnischen  Kirchenprovinz  zur  Zelt  .  .  .  Hermann  von 

Wied.  Cologne.  1876. 
Druflel,  A.  von.     Karl  V  und  die  Romische  Kurie  1544-C.     Abhaudl.  d.  MUnchener 

Akad.,  1877,  1881,  1890. 
Friedensburg,  W.     Am  Vorabend  dcs  Schmalkaldischen  Krieges.     Quellen  aus  Ital 

Archiv.  1897,  ii,  140-51. 

Die  Kriegsvorbereitungen  Karls  V.     lb.  vii,  63-71. 

Nuntiaturberichte  aus  Deutschland;  published  by  the  K.  Treuss.  hi«t.  Institut  in 

Rome  I  viii.     (Despatches  of  Verallo  1545-G.)     Gotha.     1898. 

Gachard,  L.  V.     Trois  Annies  de  Charles  Quint  1543-C.     Brussels.     1865. 
Hasenclever,  A.     Die  Politik  der  Schmalkaldeuer  vor  Ausbruch  des  Schmalk.  Krieges. 

Berlin.     1901.  , 

Kannengiesser,  P.     Der  Reichstag  zu  Worms  1544-5.     Strassburg.     1891. 

Die  Kapitulation  zwischen  Karl  V  uud  Paul  III  gegen  den  Protestauten  154C. 

Strassburg.     1888. 

Paulus,  N.    Luthers  Lebensende,  Freiburg,  1898.     (Cf.  also  the  references  in  Jansscn's 

Deutsche  Gesch.,  English  transl.  vi,  281-2.) 
Schmidt,  G.    Zur  Gesch.  des  Schmalkalder  Buudes  Dec.  1545-Feb.  1546.    Forschungen 

zur  Deutschen  Gesch.  xxv.     1885. 
Springer,  J.     Beitriige  zur  Gesch.  des  Wormser  Reichstags  1544-5.     Leipxlg.     1882. 
Ursprung  und  Ursach  gegenwertiger  Uflfriir.     Wittenberg.     1546. 
Varreutrapp,  C.     Hermann  von  Wied  und  sein  Reformatiousversuch  in  Kiiln.     Leipzig. 

1878. 
Voigt,  G.     Moritz  von  Sachsen  1541-7.     Leipzig.     1876. 

Der  Bund  mit  den  Ilabsburgern  1546.    Archiv  fiir  Siichs.  Ges.     N.  F.  iii. 


(iii)     The  Schmalkahiic   War  1546-7 

Avila,  Luis  de.  Comment,  de  la  guerra  de  Alemania  ed.  1858.  [Charles  V's  "  Com- 
mentaries" dealing  with  the  war  are  largely  based  on  Avila;  Avila's  book  roused 
resentment  among  the  German  Princes;  for  a  criticism  of  it  attributed  to 
Schartlin  see  Mencke,  Scriptt.  1730,  Vol.  in.] 

Baumgarten,  H.  Zur  Gesch.  des  Schmalk.  Krieges.  Sybel's  Hist.  Zeitschr.  Vol. 
XXXVI.     1876. 

Christmann,  Curt.     Melanchthons  Haltung  im  Schm.  Kriege.     Berlin.     1902. 

Druffel,  A.  von.  Des  Viglius  von  Zvvichem  Tagebuch  des  Schmalkald.  Donaukricgcs. 
Munich.     1877. 

Beitrag  zur  militarischen  Wurdigung  des  Schmalkald.  Krieges.     Munich.     1882. 

Etliche  kurtze  gesprache  die  jetzige  kriegsleuff  im  Teutschenland  beliingend.  Sine 
loco.     1546. 

Fischer,  Karl.  Die  Stifte  Magdeburg  und  Halberstadt  im  Schm.  Kriege.  Berlin. 
1895. 

Friedensburg,  W.  Nuntiatur  des  Verallo  1546-7.  Nuntiaturberichte  aus  Deutschland. 
Div.  I.     Vol.  IX.     1899. 

Hollander,  A.     Strassburg  im  Schmalkald.  Kriege.     Strassburg.     1881. 

Issleib,  S.  Die  Wittenberger  Kapitulation  vom  Jahre  1547.  Neues  Archiv  f lir  Silch.s. 
Gesch.     1891. 

Jahn,  J.  G.     Geschichte  des  Schmalkaldischen  Krieges.     Leipzig.     1837. 

Kannengiesser,  P.     Karl   V   und   Maximilian   von   Egmont.  Graf  von  Buren.     I«rci- 

Ladurn"e'r^  P.  J.     Der  Einfall  der  Schmalkaldeuer  in  Tirol.     Archiv  fUr  Gesch.  Tlrols. 

Innsbruck,     i,  145  sqq.  ,.,,.,1,1,. 

Le  Mang,  R.  L.     Die  Darstellung  des  Schmalk.   Krieges  in  den   Dcnkwlirdigkeiton 

Karls  V.     3  pts.    Jena,  Leipzig  and  Dresden.     1890,  1899,  1900. 


762  Germany,  1521-55 

Lenz,  M.     Die  Kriegsf iihrung  der  Schmalkaldener  gegen  Karl  V  an  der  Donau.     Sybel's 

Hist.  Zeitschr.     Vol.  xlix.     1883. 

Die  Schlacht  von  Muhlberg.     Gotha.     1879. 

Mognier,  F.    Faictz  et  Guerre  de  Charles-Quint  dans  I'Allemagne  15-16-7.     Paris.     1902. 

Neue  Zeitung  des  jetzigen  Krieges.     Sine  loco.     15i6. 

Eiezler,  S.     Die  Baierische  Politik  im  Schuaalkakl.  Krieg.  Hist.  Abhandl.  der  Baier. 

Akad.  XXI.     1894. 
Schartlin  von  Burtenbach.     Lebensbeschreibung.     Frankfort.     1777.     (Cf.  Th.  Her- 

berger,  Schartlin  uud  seine  an  die  Stadt  Augsburg  geschriebenen  Brief  e,  Augsburg, 

1852,  and  Schonhuth.  Leben  und  Thaten  Schertlius,  Miinster,  1858.) 
Stenius,    Simon.     Versio   et  Supplicatio  .  .  .  descr.    belli  Schmalkald.     In   Freher's 

t  Scriptt.  1717,  A-ol.  in. 
Summarium  dess  evangelischen,  das  ist  des  Schmalkaldischen  Kriegs.     Anon.     Sine 

loco.     2  pts.     1548. 
Tieftrunk,  K.     Odpor  stavuv  ceskych  proti  Ferdinandovi  I.     (The  revolt  of  the  Cech 

estates  against  Ferdinand  in  the  spring  of  1547.)     Prague.     1872. 
Voigt,  G.     Geschichtsschreibuug  liber  den  Schmalkaldischen  Krieg.     Leipzig.     1S74. 
AVenck,  "W.     Die  WittenbergerKapitulation  von  1547.     SybeVs  Hist.  Zeitschr.    Vol.  xx. 

(Cf .  S.  Issleib  in  N.  Archiv  ftir  Siichs.  Gesch.     Vol.  xii.) 


(iv)     Charles  V  and  his  victory 

Ascham,  Roger.     Epistolarum  libri  quatuor.     Oxford.     1703. 

A  Eeport  and  Discourse  of  the  affairs  of  Germany  during  certain  years  -while 

the  said  Roger  was  there.     London.     1570  ?     (Cf.  A.  Katterfeld,  Roger  Ascham. 
Strassburg.     1879.) 

Beutel,  G.     Ueber  den  Ursprung  des  Augsburger  Interims.     Leipzig.     1888. 

Bossert,  G.     Das  Interim  in  Wiirtemberg.     Halle.     1895. 

Briefwechsel  des  Herzogs  Christoph  von  Wtirttemberg  1550-4.     Stuttgart.     2  vols. 

1899-1901. 
Druffel,  A.  von.     Die  Seudung  des  Kardinals  Sfondrato  an  den  Hof  Karls  V  1547-8. 

Munich.     1892. 
Friedberg,    E.      Agenda.   .  .  .     Ein   Beitrag  zur  Gesch.   des   Interims    [in   Saxony]. 

Halle.     1869. 
Gossart,  E.     Charles  V  et  Philippe  II.     Brussels.     1896. 

Notes  pour  servir  a  I'hist.  du  regne  de  Charles  V.     Brussels.     1897. 

Herrmann,  F.     Das  Interim  in  Hessen.     Marburg.     1901. 

Horning,  W.    Briefe  von  Strassburger  Reformatoren  u.  a.  tiber  die  Einfiihrung  des 

Interims  in  Strassburg  (1548-54).     Strassburg.     1SS7. 
Jacobs,  Ed.     Johann  Meinerzhagen  und  das  Interim.     Elberfeld.     1893. 
Kupke,  G.     Xuntiaturen  d.  Bertano  und  Camaiani    1550-2.     Nuntiaturberichte  hrsg. 

durch  d.  k.  preussischen  Institut  in  Rom.     Vol.  xii.     1900. 
Loserth,  J.     Die  Registratur  Erzherzog  Maximilians  aus  den  Jahren  1547-1551.    Pontes 

Rerum  Austr.  xlviii. 
Meinardus,  0.     Der  Katzenelnbogische  Erbfolgestreit.     Wiesbaden.     2  vols.     1898, 

1902.     [Contains   documents   etc.   about   Philip   of  Hesse's  imprisonment,    and 

controverts  Turba,   Issleib.  and  Brandenburg.] 
Melanchthon,  P.     Bedencken  auffs  Interim,  s.  1.  1548.     Eng.  transl.     London.     1548. 
Meyer.   Chr.     Zur   Gesch.   des  Interim  in  Brandenburg-Anspach.     Hohenzollerische 

Forschungen  vi,  328-46. 

Der  Augsburger  Reichstag  nach  einem  fiirstlichen  Tagebuch.     Preuss.   Jahrb. 

1898,  206-242.  ^ 

Rachfall,  F.     Die  Trennung  der  Niederlande  vom  deutschen  Reiche.     West-Deutsche 
Zeitschr.     Vol.  xix,  pt.  2.     1900. 


Bihlioijraphy  7  63 


Turba,    G.     Verhaftung   und   Gefangeiischaft   des   Landgr.    Philipp.     Vienna.     1896. 

(Cf.  Meinardus  above,  S.  Issleib,  Die  Gefangenscliaft  des  Landgr.  in  N.  Archiv 

fur   Sachs.   Gesch.    1893,  vol.   xiv,  and  L.   Schiidel  in  Mittl.   d.   Oberhessischen 

Gesch.  Vereins,  Neue  Folge,  xi,  31-56.) 
Waldeck,  Wolrad  von.     Tagebuch  wiihrend  des  Keiclistages  zu  Augsbnrg  1548.     Ed 

C.  L.  Tross.     Stuttgart.     1861. 
Wolf,   G.      Das  Augsburger  Interim.      Zeitschr.    fur  Gesch.    d.    Wissensch.     N   F 

II,  1. 


(v)      The,   War  of  Liheralion 

Barge,  H.     Die  Verhandlungen  zu  Linz  und  zu  Passau  iin  Jahre  1552.     Stralsund. 

1893,  1897. 
Des  Moustiers-Mfirinville.     L'eveque  de  Baj'onne,  sa  vie  et  corrcspondance.     Limoo-cs. 

1895.     [Useful  for  the  bishop's  negotiations  with  respect  to  the  treaty  of  Fried- 

wald.] 
Fischer,  G.     Die  personliche  Stellung  und  polit.  Lage  Ferdinands  vor  und  wiihrend  der 

Passauer  Verliandlungen.     Konigsberg.     1891. 
Goetz,  W.     Die  bayerische  Politili  im  ersten  Jahrzehnt  der  Regierung  Herzog  Al- 

brecht  V.     Munich.     1896. 
Issleib,  S.     Moritz  von  Sachsen  gegenKarl  V  bis  zum  Kriegzuge  1552.     N.  Arch,  fiir 

Sachs.  Gesch.  vol.  vi,  1885;  the  same  continued,  ibid.  vol.  vii,  1886. 

Magdeburgs  Belagerung  durch  Moritz.     lb.  vol.  v,  1884. 

Kanngiesser,  R.     Der  Zug  Georgs  von  Mecklenburg  ins  Erzstift  Magdeburg  in  1550. 

Magdeburg.     1888. 
Kiewning,    H.     Albrechts   von   Preussen   und    Markgraf   Johanns   von   Brandenburg 

Antheil  am  Furstenbund   gegen   Karl   V.     Konigsberg.      1889.     (Cf.  Altpreuss. 

Monatsch.  xxvi  and  Forschungen  zur  Brandenb.  Gesch.  vol.  iv.) 
Neumann,   R.     Die  Politik  d.   Vcrraittlungspartei  in  1552  bis   zum  Beginn  der  Ver- 
handlungen zu  Passau.     Greifswald.     1896. 
Radlkofer,  M.     Der  Zug  Kurf.  Moritz  1552.     Zeitschr.  des  hist.  Vereins  fiir  Schwaben. 

Vol.  XVII.     1890. 
Scherer,  H.     Der   Raub  der  drei  Bisthumer  in   1552.     Raumer's  llist.  Taschenbuch. 

1842. 
Schirrmacher,  F.  W.     Johann  Albrecht  I,  Ilerzog  von  Mecklenburg.     2  pts.     Wismar. 

1885. 
Schlomka,    E.     Die    polit.    Beziehungen   zwisclien   Moritz   und   Hcinrich    II    1550-2. 

Halle.     1884. 
Schonherr,    D.     Gesammte   Schriften.      Ed.    M.    Mayr.      2   vols.      Innsbruck.     1899- 

1902. 
Voigt,  J.    Der  Furstenbund  gegen  Karl  V.     Raumer's  Hist.  Taschenbuch.     1857. 
Von  dem  Kriege  vor  Magdeburg.     In  Chroniken  derdeutscheu  Stiidte,  vol.  xxvii,  pt.  v. 

Leipzig.     1899. 
Warnecke,  A.     Die  diplomatische  Thatigkeit  des  Lazarus  von  Schwendi.     Gottingcn. 

1890. 
Wenck,  W.     Albortincr  und  Ernostiner  nach  d.  Wittenberg.  Kapitulation.     Arcliiv  fur 

Siichs.  Gesch.     Vol.  viii. 

Kurfurst  Moritz  und  Herzog  August.     lb.  vol.  ix. 

Kurfurst  Moritz   und  die   Ernestiner   in    1551-2.     Forschungen    zur  deutschen 

Gesch.     Vol.  XII. 
Witter,  J.     Die  Bezieliung  und  der  V'erkehr  des  Kurf.  Moritz  mit  Konig  Ferdinand 

1547-52.     Jena.     1886. 


764  Germany,  1521-55 


(vi)     From  the  Treaty  of  Passau  to  the  Peace  of  Augsburg 

Brandi,  K.     Der  Augsbin-ger  Religionsfriede.     Munich.     1896. 

Chabert,  F.  M.    Journal  du  siege  de  Metz.     Metz.     1857. 

Druffel,  A.     Beitrage  zur  Reiclisgeschiclite  1553-5,  ed.  K.  Brandi.     Munich.     1896. 

Ernst,  V.     Die  Entstehung  der  Executionsordnung  von  1555.     Wilrttemb.  Viertelj. 

X.     1-110. 
Griessdorf,  H.  C.  J.     Der  Zug  Karls  V  gegeu  Metz.     Halle.     1891. 
Hollander,  A.     Strassburg  im  franzosischen  Kriege  1552.     Strassburg.     1888. 
Issleib,  S.     Von  Passau  bis  Sievershausen.     N.  Archiv  fiir  Sachs.  Gesch.     Vol.  viii. 

1887. 
Joel,  E.    August  von  Sachsen  bis  zur  Erlangung  d.  Kurwurde.     N.  Archiv  fiir  Sachs. 

Gesch.     Vol.  XIX,  1898. 
Meyer,    Chr.      Zur    Gesch.    d.    markgrafl.  Krieges    1553-'!.      Hohenzollerische    For- 

schungen  v,  298-368,  vi,  52-107. 
Ritter,  M.     Der  Augsburger  Religionsfriede.     Raumer's  Hist.  Taschenbuch.     1882. 
Spieler,  Ch.  W.     Geschichte  des  Augsburger  Religionsfriedens.     Schleiz.     1854. 
Trefftz,  J.     Kursachsen  und  Frankreich  1552-6.     Leipzig.     1891. 
Voigt,  J.     Markgraf  Albrecht  Alcibiades.     2  vols.     Berlin.     1852. 
Schwabe,  L.     Kursachsen  und  die  Verhandlungen  iiber  den  Augsburger  Religions- 

frieden.     N.  Archiv  fiir  Siichs.  Gesch.     Dresden.     Vol.  x. 
Wolf,  G.    Der  Augsburger  Religionsfriede.     Stuttgart.     1890. 


CHAPTER    IX 

THE   REFORMATION   IN  *FRANCE 
I.     OKIGINAL   DOCUMENTS 

Alb6ri,    E.      Le  relazioni  degli   ambasciadori   Veneti.      I"   scric.      i-iv       Florence 

1839-60. 
Argentr^,  C.  du  Plessis  de  (Bishop  of  Tulle).     Collectio  judiciorum  de  novis  erroribus. 

I,  11.     Paris.     1728. 
Aymon,  T.     Tous  les  synodes  nationaux  des  6glises  r6form6es  de  France,    i.     The 

Hague.     1710.     (Contains  also  letters  of  Cardinal  Santa  Croce.) 
Becker,  P,  A.     Marguerite,  duchesse  d'Alen^on,  et  Guillaume  Bri^-onnet,  CvGque  de 

Meaux,  d'apres  leur  correspondauce  nianuscrite  (1521-'_'4).     Bulletin  de  la  Soci(^t6 

de  I'Histoire  du  protcstantisme   fran^ais.    Ed.  N.  Weiss,    xlix.     Paris.     1900. 

(Subsequently  cited  as  Bull.  prot.  fran§. ) 
Bourrilly,  V.  L.     Francois  I"  et  les  Protestants.     Les  essais  de  concorde  en  1535. 

Bull.  prot.  fran^.     xlix.     Paris.     1900. 

Jean  Sleidan  et  le  Cardinal  du  Bellay.     lb.  l.     1901. 

Lazare  de  Bayf  et  le  Landgrave  de  Hesse.     H). 

Buleeus,  C.  E.     Historia  universitatis  Parisiensis.     vi.     Paris.     1673. 

Calendar  of  State  Papers.  Foreign  series,  i-vi.  London.  1861-6;  Venetian,  ii-vii, 
ib.  1867-90;  Letters  and  Papers  of  Henry  VIIL  in-xvi,  ib.  1867-98.  {Fur  fur- 
ther particulars  see  BihUofjraphies  to  Chaps.  XIIT-XVI.) 

Calvin,  J.  Opera,  ed.  G.  Baum,  E.  Cunitz  and  E.  lieuss.  xi-xix.  (Letters.)  Bruns- 
wick.    1873-9. 

Castelnau,  M.  de.     Memoires.     Ed.  J.  le  Laboureur.     i.     Brussels.     1731. 

Catalogue  des  actes  de  Francois  I",  i-vii.  Paris.  1887-96.  (To  be  completed  in  10 
volumes,  the  last  three  containing  a  bibliography  and  indices.) 

Cimber,  L,  et  Daujon,  F.  Archives  Curicuses.  V  s6rie.  Paris.  1835.  iv.  Histoire 
du  tumulte  d'Amboise. 

Collection  des  documents  in^dits.  Lcttres  de  Catherine  de  Medici.s.  Ed.  H.  de  la  Fer- 
riere.  i.  1880.  N^gociations  du  regne  de  Fran^-ois  IL  Va\.  A.  L.  Paris.  1841. 
Perrenot,  A.,  Card,  de  Granvelle.  Papiers  d'^^tat.  Ed.  C.  Weiss.  iii-vi. 
1842-6. 

Cond6.     Meraoires  de  Cond6.     i-iii.     The  Hague.     1743. 

Crespin,  J.  Histoire  des  Martyrs.  Ed.  D.  Benoist  (from  the  edition  of  1619).  i,  ii. 
Toulouse.     1885-7. 

Delisle,  L.  Notice  sur  un  registre  des  procts-vcrbaux  de  la  faculty  de  thfologie  de 
Paris  pendant  les  ann6es  150.3-1533.  Paris.  1899.  [The  Ms.  of  this  register, 
which  formerly  belonged  to  the  Uuc  de  la  Tr6moille,  is  now  in  the  Bib. 
nationale.] 

Durand  de  Maillane,  P.  T.     Les  libertCs  de  I'figlise  gallicane.     6  vols.     Lyons.     1771. 

Este,  Ippolito  de  (Cardinal  of  P'errara).     N6gociations.     Paris.     1658. 

765 


766  The  Reformation  in  France 

Herminjard,  A.  L.     Correspondance  des  Reformatenrs  dans  les  pays  de  langue  fran- 

9aise.    9  vols,  published,  reaching  to  the  year  15-14.     Geneva  and  Paris.     18GG- 

97. 
Isarabert,    F.    A.     Recueil  general   des   anciennes  lois   frau^aises.     xii-xiv.     Paris. 

1828-9.     (This  will  be  superseded  for  the  reign  of  Francis  I  by  the  Ordonnances 

des  Rois  de  France.     Vol.  i  (1515,  151G)  published  1902.) 
Layard,  Sir  A.  H.     Despatches  of  Michele  Suriauo  and  Marcantonio  Barbaro,  Venetian 

Ambassadors  at  the  Court  of  France,  1560-1563.     Publications  of  the  Huguenot 

Society  of  London.     Lymington.     1891. 
L'Hospital,  Michel  de.     CEuvres.     Ed.  P.  J.  S.  Duf^y  de  I'Yvonne.     i,  ii.     Paris.     1824. 
Ribier,  G.     Lettres  et  Memoires  d'Estat.    i.    Paris.     16G6. 
Weiss,  N.    La  charabre  ardente.     Paris.     1889. 


IL     HISTORIES,    MEMOIRS,    AND    OTHER   NARRATIVES    WHOLLY   OR   IN 
PART   CONTEMPORARY 

Haton,  Claude.     Memoires.     Ed.  F.  Bourquelot.     Coll.  des  doc.  ined.     i.     Paris.     1857. 
Histoire  Ecclesiastique  des  eglises  refonnees  au  royaume  de  France.     (A  compilation 

edited  under  the  direction  of  Beza.     Antwerp.     1580.     Ed.  G.  Baum  and  E.  Cunitz. 

3  vols.     Paris.     1883-9.) 
Journal  d'un  bourgeois  de  Paris  sous  le  regne  de  Frangois  premier.     Ed.  L.  Lalanne 

for  the  Soc.  de  I'hist.  de  France.     Paris.     1854. 
Languet,  Hubert.     Epistolae  secretae.     Part  ii.     Halle.     1699. 
[La  Place,  P.  de.]     Commentaires  de  I'Estat  de  la  Religion  et  Republique  sous  les  Rois 

Henry  et  Francois  seconds,  et  Charles  nenfieme.     1565.     Reprinted  in  the  Pan- 
theon litteraire.     Ed.  J.  A.  C.  Buchon.     Paris.     1836. 
Pasquier,  Estienne.     Lettres.     Book  iv.     Paris.     1586. 
[Regnier  de  la  Planche,  L.]     Histoire  de  I'Estat  de  France  sous  le  regne  de  Frangois  II. 

1576.     Ed.  E.  Mennechet.     2  vols.     Paris.     1836. 
Roemond,  Florimond  de.     L'histoire  de  la  naissance,  progres  et  decadence  de  I'heresie 

de  ce  si^cle.     Book  vii.     Paris.     1605. 
Santa  Croce,   P.    (Cardinal).      De   civilibus   Galliae   dissensionibus.     In  Martene   et 

Durand,  Vet.    Script,    et  Monum.   amplissima   coUectio.      v.      1426-75.      Paris. 

1729. 
Saulx-Tavannes,  Gaspard  de.     Memoires.     [At  the  chateau  de  Sully.     1617.]     Michaud 

et  Poujonlat.     viii.     Petitot.     xxvi-xxviii. 
Serres,  Jean  de.     Commentarii  de  statu   religionis  et  reipublicae  in  regno  Galliae. 

Parti.     [Geneva.]     1571. 
Thou,  J.  A.   de.     Historiae   sui   temporis.    i,  ii.     Bks  i-xxix.     Paris.     1604-6.     Ed. 

S.  Buckley.     London.     1733. 


IIL     LATER   WORKS 

A.     General  Histories  of  French  Protestantism 

In  order  of  puhlicatioii 

Aubigne,  Theodore  Agrippa  de.     Histoire  Universelle.     Books  i,  ii.     Maill6.     1616. 

Ed.  A.  de  Ruble  for  the  Soc.  de  I'hist.  de  France,     i.     Paris.     1886. 
Soldan,  W.  G.     Geschichte  des  Protestantismus  in  Frankreich  bis  zum  Tode  Karls  IX. 

I.     Leipzig.     1855. 
Polenz,  G.  von.     Geschichte  des  franzosischen  Calvinismus.     i.     Gotha.     1857. 
Lutteroth,  H.     La  reformation  en  France  pendant  la  premiere  periode.     Paris.     1859. 
Baird,  H.  M.     History  of  the  rise  of  the  Huguenots  of  France,     i.     New  York.     1879. 

London.     1880. 


BiblioyniitJiij  767 


B.    Ecclesiastical  Historiks 

Gerties,  D.     Introductio  in  historiam  Evangelii  seculo  xvi  passim  per  Europaiii  reno- 

vati  cloctrinaeque  Reformationis.     i-iv.     Gruniiijjcn.     1744-52. 
Guettee,  I'Abbe.     Ilistoire  tie  I'Eglise  do  France,     viii,  i.x.     Paris.     185G. 
Hottinger,   J.    H.     llistoriae   ecclesiasticae   Novi   Tostiiuenti   Eiiueas.      vii.      713   ff. 

Hanover.     1C65. 
Lichtenberger,    F.    L.      Encyclopedic    des    Sciences    religleuses.      13    vols       Paris 

1877-82. 
Pallavicini,  Sforza.     Istoria  del  concilio  di  Trento.     Ed.  F.  A.  Zaccaria      i  ii      Kome 

1883. 
Rayualdus,  0.     Annales  Ecclesiastici.     Ed.   A.    Theiner.     xxxi-xxxiv.      Bar-le-I)uc 

and  Paris.     1877-79. 


C.     Histories  of  Protestantis.m  in  Particular  Citiks  and  Provinces 

Arnaud,  E.     Histoire  des  Protestants  de  Dauphin6.    i.    Paris.     1870. 

Histoire  des  Protestants  de  Provence,  du  Comtat  Venaissiu  et  de  la  principautfi 

d'Orange.     2  vols.     Paris.     1884. 
Coquerel,  A.  flls.    Pr6cis  de  I'histoire  de  I'figlise  reformfie  de  Paris.  1572-1594.     Paris. 

1862. 
Corbifere,   P.     Histoire  de  I'^glise   r6form6e  de  Montpellier.     Montpellier  and  Paris. 

1861. 
Dieterlen,  H.     Le  synode  general  de  Paris,  1559.    Paris.     1873. 
Floquet,  A.     Histoire  du  Parlenient  de  Normandie.     ii.     Rouen.     1840. 
Gaullieur,  E.     Histoire  de  la  reformc  a  Bordeaux  et  dans  le  ressort  du  Parlenient  de 

Guienne.     i.     Paris.     1884. 
Hauser,    H.     La    reforrae    en    Auvergne.     Bull.    prot.    frani;.     xi.vii,    xi.viii.     1898, 

1899. 
Leronx,  A.     Histoire  de  la  rfiforrae  dans  la  Marche  et  le  Limousin.     Limoges.     1888. 
Lievre,  A.     Histoire  des  Protestants  du  Poitou.    i.    Paris.     1856. 
^Moutarde,  E.     Etude  historique  sur  la  rSforme  k  Lyon.     Geneva.     1881. 
Naef,  F.     La  reforme  en  Bourgogne.     Paris.     1901. 
Puech,  A.     La  Renaissance  et  la  Reformation  a  Nismes.     Niraes.     1893. 
Robert-Labartlie,  U.  de.     Histoire  du  Protestantisrae  dans  le  Plaut  Languedoc.     2  vols 

Paris.     1895-6. 
Rossier,  L.     Histoire  des  Protestants  de  Picardie.     Paris.     1861. 
Vaurigaud,  B.     Essai  sur  I'histoire  des  6glises  rfiformfies  de  Bretagne,  1535-1808.    i 

Paris.     1870. 
Vienot,  J.     Histoire  de  la  reforme  dans  le  pays  de  i\Iontb6liard,  1524-1573.     i.     Mont 

bgliard.     1900. 

See  for  the  bibliography  of  this  section  the  sale-catalogue  of  the  library  of  Henri 
Bordier,  nos.  277-354,  Paris,  1889,  and,  for  recent  works,  H.  Hauser  in  Rev.  hist,  xxvi 
85  ff.,  1901. 

D.       BlOORAlMIIES 

Atkinson,  C.  T.     Michel  de  I'llospital.     London.     1900. 

Baird,  H.  M.     Theodore  Beza.     New  York.     1899. 

Baum,  J.  W.     Theodor  Beza.     2  vols.     Leipzig.     1843-52. 

Bersier,  E.     Coligny  avant  les  guerres  de  religion.     Paris.     1884. 

Bouill^,  R.  de.     Histoire  des  Dues  de  Guise,     i,  ii.     Paris.     1849. 

Buisson,  F.     S^iiastien  Castelliou.     i.     Paris.     1892. 

Decrue,  F.     Anne  de  Montmorency.     2  vols.     Paris.     1885  and  1889. 


768  The  Reformation  in  France 

Delaborde,  J.     Gaspard  de  Coligny.    i.     Paris.     1879. 

Doumergue,  E.     Jean  Calvin,    i,  ii.    Lausanne.     1899,  1903. 

Forneron,  H.     Les  Dues  de  Guise,    i.    Paris.     1877. 

Graf,  K.  H.     Jacobus  Faber  Stapulensis.     Zeitschrift  fur  die  historisclie  Theologie. 

Hamburg  and  Gotlia.     1852. 
Guillemin,  J.  J.     Le  Cardinal  de  Lorraine.     Paris.     1847. 
Haag,  Eugfene  and  Emile.     La  France  Protestante.     10  vols.     Paris.     1846-58.    2nd  ed. 

Ed.  H.  Bordier.     6  vols,  (to  GAS)  published.     Paris.     1877-88. 
Lefranc,  A.     La  jeunesse  de  Calvin.     Paris.     1888. 
Marcks,  E.     Gaspard  von  Coligny.     Stuttgart.     1892. 
Pinvert,  L.     Lazare  Baif .     Paris.     1900. 

Ruble,  A.  de.     Antoine  de  Bourbon  et  Jeanne  d'Albret.     2  vols.     Paris.     1881-2. 
Schmidt,  C.    Gerard  Roussel.     Strassburg.     1845. 


E.     Miscellaneous 

Bourrilly,  V.  L.  Les  pr^limiuaires  des  guerres  de  religion.  Bull.  prot.  frang.  xlv. 
1896. 

Bower,  H.  M.     The  fourteen  of  Meaux.     London.     1894. 

Hauser,  H.  La  propagation  de  la  R^forme  en  France.  Revue  des  cours  et  confe- 
rences.    Paris.     1894. 

La  Renaissance  et  la  R^forme  en  France,  1512-52.     Revue  historique.     lxiv. 

Paris.     1897. 

The  French  Reformation  and    the    French  People   in   the  Sixteenth  Century. 

American  Historical  Review,    iv.     New  York.     1899. 

Klipflfel,  H.    Le  colloque  de  Poissy.     Paris  and  Metz.     1867. 

Lefranc,  A.  Les  id^es  religieuses  de  Marguerite  de  Navarre,  d'aprfes  son  oeuvre 
po^tique.     Paris.     1898. 

Un  nouveau  registre  de  la  faculty  de  theologie  de  Paris  au  xvi^  sifecle.     Bull. 

prot.  fran9.     1902. 

Madelin,  L.     Les  premieres  applications  du  Concordat  de  1516  d'aprfes  les  dossiers  du 

Chateau  Saint-Ange.     Ecole  frau^aise  de  Rome.     Melanges  d'arch^ologie  et  d'his- 

toire.     XVII.     Paris.     1887. 
Mignet,    F.      Lettres    de    Jean    Calvin.      Journal    des    Savants.      1856,    1858,    1859. 

Paris. 
Paillard,  C.     Additions  critiques  h  I'histoire  de  la  conjuration  d'Amboise.     Rev.  hist. 

XIV.     Paris.     1880. 
Philippson,  M.     Westeuropa  im  Zeitalter  von  Philipp  II,  Elizabeth  und  Heinrich  IV. 

Oncken's  Allgemeine  Geschichte.     iii,  2,  pp.  1-113.     Berlin.     1882. 
Picot,  G.     Histoire  des  Etats  G^n^raux.     n.     Paris.     1872. 
Ranke,  L.  von.     Franzosische  Geschichte,  vornehmlich  in  16'"°  und  17*«°  Jahrhundert. 

I.     Stuttgart  and   Tubingen.     1852.    Vol.   viii   of   Sammtliche  "Werke.     Berlin. 

1874  etc. ' 
Roget,  A.     Histoire  de  Geneve,    i-vi.     Geneva.  ^  1870-81. 
RoUand,  R.     Le  dernier  proems   de  Berquin.     Ecole  frangaise  de  Rome.     Melanges. 

XII.     Paris.     1892. 
Ruble,  _^  A.  de.     Le  colloque  de  Poissy.     M^moires  de  la  Soci^t^  de  I'hist.  de  Paris  et  de 

I'ile  de  France.     XVL     Paris.     1889. 
Schmidt,  C.     Die  Unions-Versuche  Franz  I.     Zeitschr.  fiir  die  historische  Theologie. 

Leipzig.     1850. 
Sthyr,  H.  V.  (Bishop).      Lutheranerne  i  Frankrig  i  Aarene   1524-26.      Copenhagen. 

1879. 

Numerous  short  notices,  besides  the  longer  articles  cited  above,  will  be  found  in 
the  Bulletin  de  la  Soci^t^  de  I'histoire  du  protestantisme  fran5ais;  ed.  Weiss.     Paris. 


CHAPTER   X 

THE  HELVETIC   REFORMATION 

I 

A.     BIBLIOGRAPHIES 

Brandstetter,  J.  L.  Repertorium  uber  die  in  Zeit-  und  Sammelschriften  der  Jahre 
1812-1890  enthalteneu  Aufsatze  und  Mittheilungen  schweizergeschichtlichen 
Inhaltes.     Basel.     1892. 

Finsler,  G.     Zvvingli-Bibliographie.     Zurich.     1897. 

An  appendix  to  the  above  by  the  same  author,  in  Zwingliana,  1002,  No.  1  (pp. 
287-90),  brings  it  up  to  date. 

Bibliographie  der  schweizerisch-reformiertcn  Kirchen.     Vol.  i.     Die  deutschen 

Kantone.     In  Bibliographie  der  schweizerischeu  Laudesicunde.     1896. 

Haller,  G.  E.  von.  Verzeichniss  der  Bucher  und  iSchriften  betrett'end  die  Reforma- 
tionsgeschichte,  mitgetheilt  von  C.  Siegwart-Miiller,  in  Archiv  fiir  die  schwei- 
zerische  Reformationsgeschichte,  vol.  i  (18C8),  following  Ilaller'.s  Bibliothelv  der 
schweizer.  Geschichte,  1785  etc. ;  after  Mailer's  death  in  1780  the  collection  was 
continued,  and  completed  up  to  1871,  by  K.  P.  Gall-Morel  in  Archiv  f.  d.  schw. 
Reform.  Gesch.,  vol.  in  (Freiburg,  1876),  pp.  1  ff. 

Mulinen,  J.  E.  F.  von.     Prodromus  einer  schweiz.  Historiographie.     Bern.      1874. 

Sinner,  L.  von.     Bibliographie  der  Schweizergeschichte.    Bern.     1851. 

Strickler,  J.  Neuer  Versuch  eines  Litteratur-Verzeichnisses  zur  schweiz.  Reforma- 
tionsgeschichte euthaltend  die  zeitgenossische  Litteratur,  1521-1532.  In  Acten- 
sammlung,  etc.,  ed.  by  Strickler.     Vol.  v,  pt  2. 

"Wyss,  G.  v.     Geschichte  der  Historiographie  in  der  Schweiz.     Zurich.     1894. 

References  should  also  be  made  to  Anzeiger  fiir  schwcizerischc  Geschichte : 
herausgegeben  von  der  AUgemeinen  geschichtsforschenden  Gcsellschaft  der  Scliweiz 
(Bern)  for  continuations.  A  useful  English  sketch  of  the  literature  for  the  general 
history  of  Switzerland  is  given  in  Vincent,  Government  in  Switzerland  (New  York, 
1900),  pp.  341-360.  R.  Stahelin  has  published  accounts  of  Swiss  Reformation  histpri- 
cal  works  in  Brieger's  Zeitschrift  f.  Kirchengeschichte  :  for  1875-78  in  vol.  iii  (1879), 
pp.  547  flf.  :  for  1879-82  in  vol.  vi  (1884),  pp.  429  ff. 

B.     GUIDES   TO   AIS.    MATERI.VL 

Erichson.     Zwingli-Autographen  in  Elsass.     Ibid.  1886,  p|).  111-114. 
Escher,  H.     Verzeichniss  der  Zwingli-Autographen  aus  iler  Stadtbibliothck  und  der 
Kantonsbibliothek  in  Zurich.     Ibid.  1885,  pp.  217  ff. 
Archiv  fiir  schweiz.  Reformation.sgeschichtc,  t,  ii,  m,  contain  much  infonnation  on 
single  groups.     Escher's  Glaubensparteien  is  largely  based  on  unpublished  ms-*. 


c.    M.    H.    ir. 


760 


770  The  Helvetic  Reformation 

Mohr,  T.  von.  Eegesten  der  Archive  der  schweiz.  Eidgenossenschaft  auf  Anordnung 
der  schweiz.  Gescliiclitlichen  Gesellscliaft.  (Vol.  i  contains  Einsiedeln,  Canton 
Bern  before  the  Reformation,  Rapperscliwyl,  Abbey  of  Pfaffers,  etc.,  by  various 
writers.) 

Rott,  E.  Inventaire  sommaire  de  documents  relatifs  a  I'Histoire  de  la  Suisse 
conserves  dans  les  Archives  et  Bibliotheques  de  Paris,  et  specialement  de  la 
Correspondance  echangee  entre  les  Ambassadeurs  de  France  aux  Ligues  et  leur 
gouvernement,  1440-1700.  [Part  i  is  for  1444-1610,  and  Part  v  contains  the 
Index.] 

Schweizer,  P.  Verzeichniss  der  Zwingli-Autographen  aus  dera  Staatsarchiv  in  Ziirich. 
In  Theologische  Zeitschrift  aus  der  Schweiz,  ed.  Meili,  1885,  pp.  196  ff.  with  note 
on  p.  232.     Zurich. 

Stahelin,  R.     Zwingli-Autographen  in  Basel.     Ibid.  1886,  pp.  53-54. 

The  Mss.  have  been  largely  worked  over  and  printed,  especially  those  for  Zwingli's 
life.  The  Civic  and  Cantonal  libraries  are  mostly  catalogued.  For  foreign,  diplomatic, 
and  theological  relations  other  libraries,  although  largely  worked,  have  still  material : 
e.g.  Marburg,  Stuttgart,  Strassburg,  and  Innsbruck. 


A.     EDITIONS  OF   WORKS 

Huldrici  Zwinglii  Opera  :  Schuler  and  Schulthess.     8  vols.     Zurich.     1828-42. 
Supplement  by  Schulthess  and  Marthaler.     Zurich.     1861. 

A  new  edition  by  Dr  Emil  Egli  and  Dr  Georg  Fiusler  is  in  preparation,  to  be 
published  at  Berlin,  under  the  patronage  of  the  Zwingli-Verein  in  Zurich. 

The  fundamental  edition  was  that  of  Froschauer,  edited  by  Rudolph  Gualter, 
1544-5  :  the  vernacular  works  were  translated  into  Latin. 

A  useful  hand-book,  arranged  by  subjects,  is  Huldreich  Zwingli's  Sammtli<he 
Schriften  in  Auszuge,  von  L.  Usteri  und  S.  Vogelin.     Zurich.     1819-20.     2  vols. 

For  single  works  see  the  Bibliography  by  Finsler  (above). 


Ill 

CHRONICLES,    DOCUMENTS,    AND   LETTERS 

A.     General  Chronicles 

Anshelm,  V.     Berner  Chronik  vom  Anfang  der  Stadt  Bern  bis  1526.     6  vols.     Bern. 

1825-33.     Also  Bern,  1884. 
Bullinger,  H.     Ref  orraationsgeschichte.     Edited  by  Hottinger  and  Vogeli.     Frauenf  eld. 

1838-40. 
Edlibach,  G.,  mit  Einleitung  von  J.  M.  Usteri.     Mitteilnns;  der  antiquarischen  Gesell- 

schaft  in  Zurich.     Vol.  iv.     Zurich.     1846. 
Kessler.     Sabl)ata.     Chronik   der   Jahre    1523-39 :   von   Ernst   Gotzinger.     St   Gallen, 

1866-8.     Mitteilungen  z.   vaterlandischen  Geschichte.     St   Gallen.   hist.   Verein. 

Vols.  v-x.     A  new  edition  with  commentary  is  announced  by  Egli  and  Schoch. 
Myconius,  O.     Vita  Huldrici  Zwinglii  ab  Oswaldo  Myconio  conscripta.     (The  best 

edition  is  in  Neander's  Vitae  Quatuor  Reformatorum.     Berlin.     1841.) 


Bibliogritpliy  7  7 1 


Salat,  Johann.      Chronik  der  schweizerischen  Reformation  von  deren   Anfangen  bis 

A.D.    153i.     In    Archiv    fur    schweizerische    Refonnationsgeschiclitc.      Vol     i 

Solothurn.     18G8. 
Sicher.     Die   Chronilv  Fridolin  Sichers.      Edited  by   E.   Gotzinger  in  the  St  Oalli-n 

Mitteil.  zur  vaterlandisclieu  Geschichte  x.\.     Nene  Folge,  x.     St  (Jallen.     18nr.. 
Tschudi,  V.     Clironilc  der  Keformationsjalire  1521-1533,  von  I.  Stri(kler.     Sepuriitans- 

gabe  (No.  xxiv)  des  Glarner  hist.  Jahrbuchs.     Bern.     188'J.     Also  in  Archiv  fur 

Schw.  Gesch.     Vol.  ix,  pp.  322-447. 
Wyss.     Die   Chronik   des   Bernhard    Wyss,    von   Gcorg   Finsler.      Basel.      1001.      In 

Quellen   zur   scliweizerischen  lieformationsgeschichte  unter  Leitung  von  Dr  K 

Egli. 

See  also    Verzeichniss  in  the  Index  Volume    (Vol.   v,   pt  2)    of  Strickler's  Acten- 
sammlung. 

B.       DOCr.MENTS 

General 

Egli,  E.     Actensammlung  zur  Geschichte  der  Ziiricher  Reformation,  1519-33.     Zurich. 

1879. 
Fiisslin,  J.  K.     Beytrage  zur  Erlauterung  der  Kirchen  Reformationsgeschichte  de» 

Schweizerlandes.      5   pts.      Zurich.      1741-55.      See    especially    the    article    on 

Conrad  Hofmann. 
Gisi,  W.     Actenstticke  zur  Schweizergeschichte  der  Jahre  1521-1522  (contains  French 

documents).     Archiv  fiir  Schw.  Gesch.     Vol.  xv,  pp.  285-318. 
Simler,  J.  J.     Samralung  alter  und  neuer  Urkunden  zur  Beleuch.  der  Kirchengcschichte, 

vornehmlich  des  Schweizerlandes.     2  vols.     Zurich.     175'.t-(!3. 
Strickler,   .J.     Eidgenoss.   Abschiede.     Vol.    iv,    i   a    (1521-2«j,  Brugg,    1873  and   i   h 

(1529-33),  Zurich,  1876. 
Actensammlung    zur    schv^eizerischen    Reformationsgeschichte   in   den   Jahren 

1521-32.     5  vols.     Zurich.     1877-1884. 


C.     Chronicles,    Documents,  etc. 
Special  poijits  and  subjects 

Bannwart,   P.  (edited  by).     Denkschrift  der  Priorin  und  Schwestern  in  St  Cathari- 

nathal  liber   ihre   Erlebnisse  wiihi'end  der  Reformationszeit.     Archiv  fiir  schw. 

Ref.  Ill,  pp.  99-116. 
Basel.     Chronik  des  Karthiiuser-Klosters  in  Klein-Basel,  1401-1532.     In  Basler  Chroni- 

ken,  vol.  i  (edited  by  W.  Vischer  und  A.  Stern).     Leipzig.     "887. 
Bernoulli,  A.  (edited  by).     Die  Anonyme  Chronik  der  Mailanderkriege  (1507-16).     In 

Basler  Chroniken,  vol.  vi,  pp.  463  f.     Leipzig.     1902. 
Bliisch,  E.  (edited  by).     Fine  neue  Quelle  zur  Gesch.  der  Berner  Disput.     In  Theolog. 

Zeitschrift  aus  der  Schweiz,  1891,  pp.  157  ff. 
Bucer,  M.     Ilistorische  Nachricht  von  dem  Gcsprach  zu   Marburg  zwischen  Luthern 

und  Zwinglin.     In  Simler,  Sammlung,  etc.     Vol.  ii,  i)t  ii,  pp.  471  s(i<i. 
Collin,   R.     Summa   colloquii   Marpurgensis.     In    Ilospinian,    Ilistoria   Sacramentaria 

{see    below.    Theological    section),    or    in    Zwingli,    Opera    (edd.   Schuler  und 

Schulthess),   iv,  pp.   173  ff. 
Cysat,  Renward.     Luzern's  Geheimbuch  verfasst  von  Stadtschreiber  R.  Cysat.     Edited 

by  Scherer-Boccard.     Archiv  fiir  schw.  Ref.  iii,  pp.  117-176. 
Egli,  E.     Documente  und   AbhandUingen   zur  Geschichte   Zwinglis  und  seiner  Zeit. 

Printed  in  Analecta  Reformatoria  i,  pp.  1-24.     Zurich.     1899. 


772  Tlte  Helvetic  Reformation 

Egli,  E.    On  Zwingli's  notes  concerning  the  Bernese  Disputation  in  Staatsarchiv,  Zurich. 

Analecta  Ref  ormatoria  i,  pp.  37-44. 
Faber,  J.  (Bishop).     Report  of  the  Disputation  of  Jan.  29,  1523,  to  the  Innsbruck  gov- 
ernment.    In  Katholische  Schweizerblatter,  Series  11  (1895),  No.  ii,  pp.   183  fl". 

Edited  by  J.  G.  Mayer.     Lucerne.     1895. 
Gall-Morel,  R.  P.     Urkunden  zur  Geschichte  Zwinglis  aus  dem  Stiftsarchiv  Einsiedeln. 

ASRG.  I,  pp.  787  ff. 
Hedio.     Reisebericht   (to  Marburg).     Edited  by  Erichson  in  Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchen- 

geschichte,  iv,  pp.  420  ff. 
Kiissenberg,  H.     Chronik  (for  Baden,  1522  onwards).     Edited  by  Huber  in  Archiv  fiir 

schw.  Ref.  Ill,  pp.  411  ff. 
Landolt.     Urkunden    zur    Reformationsgeschichte    des   Stadtcheus    Stein-am-Rhein, 

1523-8.     In  Archiv  fiir  schw.  Ref.  iii,  pp.  624-630. 
Lavater.    Verantwortungbetreffend  seinen  Oberbefehl  bei  Kappel.     Edited  by  Egli  in 

Anal.  Reform,  r,  pp.  150-164. 
Ryff,  F.     Chronik,  1514-41.      In  Easier  Chroniken,  vol.  i,  edited  by  Vischer  und  Stern. 

Leipzig.     1887. 
Ryhiner,  H.     Chronik  des  Bauernkrieges,  1525.     In  Easier  Chroniken,  vol.  vi,  edited 

by  A.  Bernoulli,  pp.  463  ff.     Leipzig.     1902. 
Scherer-Boccard.     Acten   zum    Christlichen   Btindniss   zwischen   Ferdinand  und    den 

V  Orten  (1525-29).     Aus  dem  Luzerner  Staatsarchiv.     Archiv  fiir  schw.  Ref.  in, 

pp.  555-598. 
Prelim iuaracten  zu  einem  Schutzbiindniss  zwischen  Papst  Clement  VII,  Kaiser 

Karl  V,  und  den  V  Katholischen  Orten.     Archiv  fiir  schw.  Ref.  ii,  pp.  546-557. 
135  piipstliche  Schreiben  an  Tagsatzungen,  Orte,  etc.,  grossentheils  aus  dem 

XVI  Jahrhundert.     Archiv  fiir  schw.  Ref.  ii,  pp.  1-97. 
[See  also  Cysat.] 
Schirrmacher.     Briefe  und  Acten  zur  Geschichte  des  Religionsgespraches  zu  Marburg 

1523  und  des  Reichstages  zu  Augsburg  1530  nach  den  Handschriften  des  Joh. 

Aurifaber.     Gotha.     1876. 


D.     Letters 

See  also  Finsler's  Bibliographie,  pp.   171-2;  and  Zwingli's  Letters  in  vols,  vii  and 
VIII  of  Opera. 

Arbenz,  E.  Die  Vadianische  Brief sammlung.  In  Mitt,  zur  vaterlandischen  Ge- 
schichte XXIV,  4,  pp.  80  ff.,  XXV,  XXVII,  and  xxviii,  pp.  1  ff.  St  Gallen. 
1890. 

Egli.  J.  E.  Unpublished  letters  from  the  Augsburg  Reichstag  (Aug.  and  Sept.  1530). 
In  Analecta  Reformatoria  i,  pp.  45-60.     Zurich.     1899. 

Fechter.  Achtzehn  ungedruckte  Briefe  von  Ulrich  Zwiugli  und  Albertus  Durerius 
an  B.  Rhenanus.  In  Archiv  fiir  schw.  Geschichte,  vol.  x,  pp.  185  ff.  Zurich. 
1885. 

Friedensburg,  W.  Beitrage  zum  Briefwechsel  der  katholischen  Gelehrten  Deutsch- 
lands  im  Reformationszeitalter.  Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirchengesch.  Vol.  xx,  pp.  59- 
95  and  242-259  for  letters  of  Bishop  Faber.     1899-1900. 

Fiisslin,  J.  K.  Epistolae  ab  Ecclesiae  Helveticae  reformatoribus  vel  ad  eos  scriptao. 
Zurich.     1742. 

Herminjard,  A.  L.  Correspondance  des  R^formateurs  dans  les  pays  de  langue  fran- 
gaise  (especially  vol.  ii).     8  vols.     Geneva,  Basel,  Lyons,  Paris.     1866-93. 

Lenz,  M.  Zwingli  und  Landgraf  Philip.  In  Zeitschr.  fur  Kirchengesch.  1879,  vol. 
Ill,  pp.  28  ff.,  220  ff.,  429  ff. 

Liebenau,  T.  von.  Briefe  iiber  die  Disputation  in  Baden.  Aus  dem  Luzerner  Staats- 
archiv.    Archiv  fur  schw.  Ref.  1869,  i,  pp.  798  ff. 


Bibliography  7  7 :5 


Scherer-Boccard,  T.  von.  Schreiben  Franz  I  von  Frankreich  an  Orte  der  Eidce- 
nossenschaft.  Aus  dera  Staatsarchiv  von  Luzeru.  Arcliiv  fiir  schw  Uef  in 
pp.  631-640. 

Staheliu,  R.     lUiefe  aus  der  Keformationszeit.     Hascl.     1887. 

Troll,  J.  K.  Three  Letters  to  the  Council  at  Wintcrthur."  Printed  in  Nonjahr-^bl 
V.  d.  Burgerbibliothelv  zu  AVinterlhur,  xi  G,  vi  ],  v  IG.     Winterthur.     1844. 

Virck,  II.,  and  Winckelinann,  0.  Politisclie  Correspondenz  der  Stadt  Strassburg  iin 
Zeitalter  der  Keforniation.     Strassbiirg.     i.     1882.     ii.     1887. 

Wartmann.  II.  Fiiiif  Briefe  H.  Zwinglis  an  Joachim  von  Watt  aus  dcm  Stadt- 
archiv  von  St  Gallen,  Mitteil.  zur  vaterliind.  Geschichte  in.  on.  210-216 
1866.     St  Gallen.  ^ 


IV 

A.     BIOGRAPHIES 

{In  order  of  importance) 

Stahelin,   R.      Huldreich    Zwingli.      Sein    Leben    und    Wirken    nach    den    Qucllcn 

dargestellt.     2  vols.     Basel.     1895-97. 
Morikofer,  J.  C.     Ulrich  Zwingli  nach  den  urkuudlichen  Quellen.     2  vols.     Leipzig. 

1867-69. 
Christoffel,    R.     Huldreich   Zwingli,    Leben   und   ausgewiihlte    Schriften.     Elberfeld. 

1857.     The   biography  translated   into   English   by  Cocliran.     Edinburgh.     1858. 
Jackson,  S.  M.     Huldreicli  Zwingli,  1484-1531.     New  York  and  London.     1901. 

Also :  Stahelin  in  Herzog-Plitt,  Real-Encyclopadie :  Hoff  in  Lichtenbergcr's 
Encyclopedic  des  Sciences  religieuses,  1882,  vol.  xii,  pp.  521  ff.  :  Egli  in  Allg. 
Deutsche  Biographic. 


B.     BIOGRAPHICAL   STUDIES   AND    ARTICLES 
See  also  Finsler's  Bibliographic,  pp.  169-172 

Christen,  E.     Zwingli  avant  la  R^forme  de  Zurich.    Geneva.     1899. 

Egli,  E.     Zwingli   und   die   Ostschweizerisclien   Anhanger  der   Lutherischen   Abcnd- 

mahlslehre.    In  Anal.  Reform,  i,  pp.  61  ft'. 
. Zwingli  und  die  Synoden,  besonders  in  der  Ost-Schweiz.     In  Anal.  Reform,  i, 

pp.  80  ff. 
■ Zwinglis    Stellung    zum    Kirchenbann    und    desscn    Vertcidigung    durc-h    die 

St  Galler.     In  Anal.  Reform,   i,  pp.  99  ff. 

Zwingli   in    Wieu.      Theolog.    Zeitschrift    aus   d.    Schwciz.      Zurich.      Vol.    i, 

1884,  p.  92. 

Die   Namensform   Zwingling.     Theolog.    Zeitschrift   aus   d.   Scliweiz.     Vol.    i, 

1884,  p.  185. 

Erichson,  A.     Zwinglis  Tod  und  dcssen    Bcurthcilung  durch  Zeilircnossen.     Stras^s- 

burg.     1883. 
Ghinzoni.     Ulrico    Zwinglio    e    Francesco    II    Sforza.     Boll.   Stor.   della    Svizz<  ra 

Italiana  xv,  1893,  pp.  9  ff.     Bellinzona. 
Heer,  G.     Zwin<rli  als  Pfarrer  von  Glarus.     Zurich.     1884. 
Kind,    Paul.     Ulrich    Zwingli  und    Franz    II    Sforza.       Theolog.    Z.-itschrift   aus   d. 

Schweiz.     1896,  pp.  131-9. 
Nitz,  C.  A.     Ulrich  Zwingli.     Gotha.     1884. 
Odinger,  Th.     Ein  Idyll  Rudolf  (Jualter's  iiber  Zwinglis  Tod.     Tlicolog.  Zeitschrift 

aus  d.  Schweiz.     1891,  pp.  54-59. 


774  The  Helvetic  Reformation 

Oechsli,  W.     Zwingli  als  politischer  Theoretiker.     In  Turicensia,  pp.  87-113.    Zurich. 

1891. 
Keber,  B.     Zwinglis  politisches  Wirken  bis  zur  Schlacht  von  Pavia.     Beitrage   zur 

vaterland.  Geschichte.     Vol.  v,  1854,  pp.  245  flf. 
Schweizer,  A.     Zvvinglis  Bedeutung  neben  Luther,    Zurich.     1884. 
Stahelin,  R.     Huldreich  Zwingli  und  sein  Reformationswerk.     Halle.     1883. 

Zwingli  als  Prediger.     Theolog.  Zeitschr.  aus  d.  Schweiz.     1887,  pp.  12  flF. 

Steek,  R.     Zwingli  in   Basel.     Theolog.   Zeitschrift  aus  d.   Schweiz.     Vol.    i,    1884, 

pp.  185-187. 

Usteri,  L.  Initia  Zwinglii.  Studien  und  Kritiken,  Jahrg.  58,  1885,  pp.  607-G72, 
und  Jahrg.  59,  1886,  pp.  95-159:  also  separately  printed. 

• Zu    Zwinglis     Elenchus.      Zeitschr.     fiir    Kirchengesch.      Vol.    xi.      1889-90, 

pp.  161-165.  (See  also  Baur,  Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirchengesch.  x,  1889,  pp.  330- 
344.) 

Werder,  J.  Zwingli  als  politischer  Reformator.  Beitrage  zur  vaterliindischen  Ge- 
schichte, Neue  Folge.     Vol.  i,  pp.  268  ff.     Basel,     1882. 

For  various  details   reference  should    be  made   to    Zwingliana,    Zurich,    1897   etc., 
ed.  Egli, 

C.     HISTORIES 
a.     General 

Beard,  C,     The  Reformation  of  the  16th  century  in  its  relation  to  modern  thought 

and  knowledge.     London.     1883. 
Hagenbach,  K.  R.     Kirchengeschichte  von  der  altesten  Zeit  bis  zum  19  Jahrhuudert. 

Vol.    III.      Geschichte  der    Reformation    vorziiglich    in    Deutschland    und  der 

Schweiz.     4th  ed.     Leipzig.     1870.     Translated  into  English  by  Evelina  Moore. 

2  vols.     Edinburgh.     1878-79. 
Hergenrother,  J.  A.  G.     Concilien- Geschichte  (Vol.    ix   of   Hefele).     Freiburg  i.   B. 

'  1890. 
Janssen,  J.,  and  Pastor,  L.     Geschichte  des  deutschen  Volkes  seit  dem  Ausgang  des 

Mittelalters.     Freiburg   i.  B.     1899.     Especially  vol.    in,   pp.    92-264;    also.    An 

meine  Kritiker  (Freiburg  i.  B.   1891)  ;  and,  Ein  zweites  Wort  an  meine  Kritiker 

(Freiburg  i.  B.   1895). 
MoUer,  W.,  and  Kawerau,  G.     Lehrbuchder  Kirchengeschichte.     Vol.  iti,  Reformation 

und    Gegenreformation.     Freiburg  i.    B.    and  Leipzig.     1894.     Translated  into 

English  by  J.  H.  Freese.     London  and  New  York.     1900. 
Ranke,  L.   v.     Deutsche   Geschichte  ira  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.     Especially  in, 

pp.  40-72,  232-269,     Vol.  iv  of  Sammtliche  Werke,     Leipzig.     1874  etc, 
Schaff,   P.     History   of    the  Christian   Church.     Modern   Christianity.     The   German 

Reformation,  a.d.  1517-1530  (Divisions  I  and  II).     Edinburgh.     1888. 

b.     Constitutional,  Econo.mic,  etc. 

Blumer,   J.  J.      Rechtsgeschichte  der    Schweiz.   Demokratien.      (For  Uri,   Schwyz, 

Unterwalden,  Glarus,  Zug,  and  Appenzell.)     Vol.  i,  to    1531.     Vol.  ii,  to  1798. 

St  Gallen.     1850  and  1858. 
Bluntschli,  J.   C.     Geschichte  des   Schweizerischen  Bundesrechtes  von  dem   ersten 

ewigen  Bunde  bis  auf  die  Gegenwart,     Vol,  i,  to  p.  343,     Vol.  ii,  documents, 

to  page  276.     Stuttgart.     1875. 
Dandliker,  K.     Die   Berichterstattungen   und   Anfragen  der  Zurcher   Regierung  an 

die  Landschaft  in  der  Zeit  vor  der  Reformation.     Jahrbuch  fiir  schw.  Gesch. 

Vol.  XXI,  pp.  38-70. 

Ziircher     Volksanfragen    von    1521    bis    1798.      Jahrbuch    fiir    schw.    Gesch. 

Vol.  xxin,  pp.  147  f. 


Bibliography  775 


Dubs,  A.     Das  offentliche  Recht  der  Schweiz.  Eidgenossenschaft.    i,  ii.     2nd  edition. 

Zurich.     1878. 
Erhardt.      Die   national-iikonomischen  Ansichten  der   Rcformatoreu.      Zwciter  Art. 

Huldreicii  Zwingli.     Theoloj;.  Stud.  u.  Kriliiv.  1881,  i,  pp.  106  IV. 
Fechter,  D.  A.     Easels  Anstalten  zur  UnterstiitzuuK  der  Armen  und  Kraiikcn  wiihrcnd 

des  Mittelalters.     Beitriige  zur  vat.  Gescliichte,  iv,  18.">. 
Moses.     Federal  Government  of  Switzerland.     Uaivlaiid,  California.     1880. 
Riggenbach.     Das  Armenwesen  der  Reformation.     Basel.     188.). 
Strickler,  J.     Grundzinse,  Frohndienstc  und  Zehnten,  oder  Bildor  aus  der  Geschlchte 

des  bauerlichen  Grundebesitzes.     Zeitschr.  f.  Schweiz.  Statistik.     1874.     2. 
Vincent,  J.  M.     Government  in  Switzerland.     New  York  and  London.     I'JOO. 


c.     Local,  ktc. 

Baden,  R.     Die  Reformation  und  ihr  Einfluss  auf  das  Ziircherische  Recht.     Theolog. 

Zeitschrift  aus  d.  Schweiz.     1902  (i),  pp.  9-20. 
Baur,   A.     Zur  Vorgeschichte   der   Disputation   von   Baden.     Zeitschr.   fiir  Kirchcn- 

gesch.     "Vol.  XXI,  pp.  91-111.     1900-1. 
Blosch,  E.     Der  Kardiual  Schinner.     Akademischer  Vortrag.     1890. 

Geschichte   der   schweizerisch-reformierten  Kirchen.      Vols,    i   and   ii.      Bern. 

1899. 

Die  Vorreformation  in  Bern.     Jahrbuch  fiir  schw.  Gesch.     Vol.  ix.     1884. 

Brieger.     Ueber  einen  angeblich  neuen  Bericht  iiber  das  Marburger  Religionsgesprach. 

In  Zeitschr.  fiir  Kirchengesch.  i,  pp.  028-638. 
Biichtold,  J.     Hans  Salat.     Sein  Leben  und  seine  Schriften.     Basel.     1876. 

Nicklaus  Manuel.     In  vol.  ii  of  the  Bibliothek  iilterer  Schriftwerke  der  deutschcn 

Schweiz  und  ihrer  Grenzgebiete.     Franenfeld.     1876. 

Camenisch,  C.     Carlo  Borromeo  und  die  Gegenrcformation  im  Veltlin.    Chur.     1901. 
Clemen,  0.    Hinne  Rode.     Zeitschr,  fiir  Kirchengesch.     Vol.  xviii,  pp.  346-372  and 

note  639-640.     1897-8. 
Coolidge,  W.  A.  B.     The  Republic  of  Gersau.     English  Hist.  Review  n,  pp.  481  f. 
Diei'auer,  J.     Geschichte  der  schweizerischen  Eidgenossenschaft.     Vol.  ii,  to  1510. 

Gotha.     1892. 
Dandliker,  K.     Komtur  Schmidt  von  Kiissnacht.     In  Ziiricher  Taschenbuch.     1897. 
•    Geschichte  der  Scliweiz.     3  vols.     Zurich.     1884. 

A  short  history  of  Switzerland,  translated  by  Salisbury.    London.     1899. 

Egli,  E.     Ziircherische  Kirchenpolitik  von  Waldmann  bis  Zwingli.     Jahrbuch  fiir  schw. 
Gesch.     Vol.  XXI,  pp.  1-34. 

Die  Ziiricher  Widertaufer  zur  Reforraationszeit.     Zurich.     1878. 

Die  Schlacht  von  Cappel,  1531.     Mit  zwei  Pliinen  und  einein  Anliangc  ungc- 

druckter  Quellen.     Zurich.     1873. 

Das  Ueligionsprach  zu  Marburg.     Theolog.  Zeitschrift  aus  der  Schweiz.     Vol.  i, 

1884,  pp.  5-30.     Zurich. 

Ernest,   Ulrich.     Geschichte  des   Ziirchischen   Schulwesens   bis  gcgen   Ende  des   16 

Jahrhunderts.     Zurich.     1879. 
Escher,  II.     Die  Glaubensparteien  in  der  Eidgenos.senschaft  und  ihre  Bezichungen  zum 

Ausland  :  vornchmlich  zum  Hause  Ilabsijurg  und  zu  den  deutschen  Protestanten. 

Frauenfeld.     1882.     [Of  llrst-rate  importance.] 
Die  Verhaltnisse  der  freicn  Gotteshausleuto.     Archiv  f.  sch.  Geschichte.     Vol. 

VI,  pp.  3-29.     1849.     Zurich. 
Fiali.     Reformation  und  Gegenrcformation  in  den  freicn  Amtcicn.     Archiv  fiir  schw. 

Ref.  pp.  529  «. 
Gisi,  W.     Antheil  der  Eidgenossen  an  der  europiiischen  IV)litik  in  don  .lalircn   1512  bis 
'  1516.     Schafl'hausen.     1866. 


776  The  Helvetic  Reformation 

Gisi,  W.     Der  Antheil  der  Eidgenossen  an   der  europaischen  Politik  wahrend   der 

Jahre  1517  bis  1521.     ArcMv  f.  sch.   Geschichte.     Vol.  xvii,  pp.  63-132.     1871. 

Zurich. 
Gotziuger,  E.     Zwei  Kalender  vora  Jahre  1527.     Schafl'liausen.     1865. 
Griineisen,  E.     Nicklaus  Manuel.     Stuttgart.     1837. 
Herzog,  J.  J.     Christoph  von  Uttenheim,  Bischof  von  Basel  zur  Zeit  der  Reformation. 

Beitrage.     Vol.  i,  1839,  pp.  33-93  (with  note  on  p.  305).     Basel. 
Hidber,  B.     Renward  Cysat,  der  Stadtschreiber  zu  Luzern.    Archiv  f .  schw.  Geschichte. 

Vol.  XIII,  pp.  161-224  and  xx,  pp.  3-88. 
Horawitz,  A.     Johaun  Heigerlin  (gen.  Faber),  Bischof  von  Wien.     Vienna.     1884. 
Huber,   A.      Die   Waldstatte  bis   zur  festen  Begriindung   ihrer    Eidgenossenschaft. 

Innsbruck.     1861. 
Hyrvoix.     Frangois  I'^''  et  la  premiere  guerre  de  religion  en  Suisse  1529-1531,  d'apres  la 

correspondance  diplomatique.     In  Revue  des  Questions  historiques,  April,  1902, 

pp.  465-537. 
Jecklin,  F.     Blaurock.     In  Jahresbericht  xxi  der  histor.-antiq.-Gesellschaft  von  Grau- 

bunden.     1891.     pp.  1  f. 
Kawerau,  W.    Thomas  Murner  und  die  deutsche  Reformation.     Halle.     1891. 
Kesselring.     Interpolirte  Zwingli  Briefe.     Theolog.  Zeitschrift  aus  d.  Schweiz.     Vol. 

I,  1884.     Zurich. 
Kluckhohn.      Urkundliche  Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  der  kirchlichen  Zustande;    ins- 

besondere  des   sittlichen  Lebens    der    katholischen    Geistliche  in  der  Diocese 

Konstanz  wahrend    des    xvi    Jahrhunderts.      Zeitschr.    fiir   Kirch.      Vol.    xvi, 

1896-7,  pp.  590-625. 
Lichtenhahn,  K.     Die  Secularisation  der  Kloster  und  Stifte  Basels.     Beitrage.     Vol.  i, 

pp.  94-109. 
Loserth.     Die  Stadt  Waldshut  und  die  vorder-osterr.  Regierung,  1523-1526.     In  Arch. 

f.  bst.  Ges.  77,  pp.  1  ff. 
Ltithi,  E.     Die  Bernische  Politik  in  den  Kappelerkriegen.     Bern.     1880. 
Mai'mor,  W.     Die  Beziehungen  der  Stadt  Constanz  zu  der  Eidgenossenschaft  wahrend 

des  Mittelalters ;  1259-1520.    Archiv  f.  schw.  Geschichte.    Vol.  xviii,  pp.  111-189. 

1873.     Zurich. 
Mayer,  J.  G.     Das  Konzil  von  Trient  und   die  Gegenreformation  in  der  Schweiz. 

Vol.  I.     Stanz.      1901. 

Das  Stift  Rheinau  und   die  Reformation.     Jahrbuch  fiir  schw.   Gesch.     Vol. 

XXVI,  pp.  295-312. 

Meyer  von  Kaonau.     Aus  der  schweiz.  Geschichte  in  der  Zeit  der  Reformation  und 

Gegenreformation.     Die  Eidgeuossenscliaft  gegeniiber  dem   deutschen  Bauern- 

krieg  von  1526.     Hist.  Zeitschrift,  1878,  i. 
Meyer,  D.     Die  Reformation  der  deutschen  Schweiz  ira  Gewande  der  dramatischen 

Dichtung.     Theolog.  Zeitschrift  aus  d.  Schweiz.     1892,  pp.  121-128  and  163-176. 
Mezger,  J.  J.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Bibelubersetzungen  in  der  schw.   reform. 

Kirche.     Basel.     1876. 
Nitsche,   R.      Geschichte  der  Wiedertaufer  in  der  Schweiz    zur    Reformationszeit. 

Einsiedeln.     1885. 
Oechsli,  W.     Zwingli  als  politischer  Theoretiker.     In  Turicensia,  pp.  87-113.    Zurich. 

1891. 

Das  eidgenoss.  Glaubensconcordat  von  1525.     Jb.  f .  Sch.  Ges.  xiv,  pp.  263  ff. 

Die  Anfange  des  Glaubens-konfliktes  zwischeu  Zurich  und   den  Eidgenossen 

1521-1524.     Winterthur.     1883. 

Oper,  L.     Die  Stadt  Basel  und  ihr  Bischof.     Beitrage.     Vol.  iv  (1850),  pp.  229  ff. 
Pastor,  L.     Die  kirchlichen  Reunionsbestrebungen  wahrend  der  Regierung  Karls  V. 

aus  den  Quellen  dargestellt.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1879. 
Pestalozzi,  C.      Heinrich  BuUinger.     Leben  und  ausgewJihlte  Schriften.     Elberfeld. 

1858. 
Riggenbach,  E.  J.     Der  Kirchengesang  in  Basel  seit  der  Reformation.     In  Beitrage, 

vol.  IX  (1870),  Basel,  pp.  327  ff.     Also  note  on  same  in  vol.  x  (1875),  p.  365. 


Bihliograplii) 


Rilliet,  A.     Les  Origines  de  la  Confederation  Suisse.     Ilistoire  et  Lecende.     Geneva 

1869. 
Rockholz,  E.  L.     Tel  und  Gessler.     Heilbronn.     1877. 
Rohrer,  F.     Das  cluistliche  Burgerrecht.     Luccnie.     1876. 
Das   sogenanute   Waldmanuische   Concordat.     Jahrbuch   f.    Schw.   Geschichlc. 

Vol.   IV,  pp.   1  ff.  1879  (with  criticism  by  Stahelin,  Zeitschr.  fur  KirchenKesch. 

1884,  pp.  429  fl'.). 
Rett,  E.     Histoire  de  la  representation  diplomatique  de  la  France  auprfes  des  cantons 

suisses,  de  leurs  allies,  et  de  leurs   confederes.     2   vols.     Vol.    i    (UaO-1559). 

Bern.     1900. 
Ruchat,   A.     Histoire  de  la  Reformation  de  la  Suisse,  edited  by  VuUieniin.     7  vols. 

Paris  and  Lausanne.     1885-8. 
Salzberger,    G.     Beitriige    zur   Toggenburgischen  cvangelischen   Kircheugcschichie. 

Mitteil.  zur  vaterliindische  Geschichte.     in,  pp.  16  ff.     1866.     St  Gallen. 
Sarasin,  A.     Versuch  einer  Geschichte    des  Easier  Miinsters.      In   Beitriige,  vol.    i 

(1839),  pp.  1-32. 
Schaffroth,  J.  G.     Der  Rcformator  Niklaus  Manuel  von  Bern.     Basel.     1885. 
Schiss.     Die  Beziehungen  Graubiindens  zur  Eidgenossenschaft  besondcrs  zu  Ziirich  im 

XVI  Jahrhundert.     Jahrbuch  fiir  schw.  Gesch.     Vol.  xxvn,  pp.  29  f. 
Schreiber,  H.     Heinrich  Loriti  Glareanus.     Freiburg.     1837. 
Schultz,  Emil.     Reformation  und  Gegenreformation  in  den  freien  Aemtern.     Basel. 

1899. 
Schweizer,  P.    Die  Behandlung  der  Ziircherischen  Klostergiiter  in  d.  Rcformations- 

zeit.     In  Theolog.  Zeitschrif t  aus  der  Schw.  (ed.  Meili).    Vol.  u  (1885).  pp.  161  If. 

Zurich. 
Seitz,  O.     Die  Stelluug  des  Urbanus  Rhegius  im  Abendmahlsstreite.     ZKG.     Vol.  .\i.\. 

pp.  293-329.     1898-9. 
Stahelin,  R.    Die  ref ormatorische  Wirksamkeit.  .  .  .    Vadians.    Beitriige,  Neue  Folge. 

I  (1882),  pp.  191-262. 
Stehlin,  K.     Ueber  die  diplomatischen  Verbindungen  Englands  niit  der  Schweiz  im  16 

und  17  Jahrhundert.     Beitrage.     Vol.  vii  (1860),  pp.  45  f. 
Vetter,  F.     Die  Reformation  von  Stadt  und  Kloster  Stein-am-Rliein.    Jahrl)uch  fiir 

schw.  Gesch.     Vol.  ix,  1884,  pp.  213-261. 
Vischer,  W.     Die  Sage  von  der  Befreiung  der  Waldstiitte.     Leipzig.     1867. 
Vogelin,  S.     Das  alte  Zurich.     Zurich.     1878. 
Vuilleumier,  H.  V.     L'Eglise  du  pays  de  Vaud  au  temps  de  la  Reformation.     Lau>*anne, 

1902. 
VuUiemin,  L.     Histoire  de  la  Confederation  Suisse.     2  vols.     Lausanne.     1879. 
Waldburger,   A.     Rheinau  und  die  Reformation.     Jahrbuch  fiir  schw.  Gesch.     Vol. 

XXV,  pp.  81-362. 
Weber,  H.     Geschichte  des  Kirchengesangs  in  der  deutschen  reformirten  Schweiz  seit 

der  Reformation.     Zurich.     1878. 
Wyss,  G.  von.     Ueber  d.  Geschichte  d.  drei  Landc,  1215-1301.     Zurich.     1858. 


d.     TiiKOi.or.ic.vL 

[^-ee  also  Stahelin,  Christoffol  and  Miirikofer  in  Biographies;  aUo  Corpus  Rcfor- 
matorum,  Breitschneider,  vol.  xxvi.] 

Baur,   Aug.      Zwlnglis   Theologic,    ihr    Wcrdcn    und    ihr    System.      2    vols.      Hall.-. 

1885-89.  ^ 

Daniel,  H.  A.     Codex  Liturgicus  (especially  vol.  iii).     4  vols.     Leipzig.     1847-53. 
Dieckhoff,  A.   W.     Die  Evangclische   Abcndmahlslehre   im   Reformationszeitaltcr.     i 

[all  that  has  appeared].     Gottingen.     1854. 


778  The  Helvetic  Reformation 

Diltliey,  W.      In  Archiv    fiir    Geschichte  der  Pliilosoplile.   vol.   v,  1892,  pp.  367  ff.  : 
vol.  VI,  1893,  pp.  119  ff.,  pp.  523  ff. 

Die  Glaubenslehre  der  Reformatoren.     In  Preuss.  Jahrbucher,  1894,  i,  70. 

Engelhardt,  E.     Die  innere  Genesis  und  der  Zusammenliang  der  Marburger,  Schwa- 

bacher  und  Torgauer  Artikel,  sowie  der  Aiigsburger  Confession.     In  Zeitschrift 

fiir  hist.  Theologie,  18G5,  pp.  519-529. 
Frank,  F.  H.  R.     Die  Theologie  der  Concordienformel.     4  vols.     Erlangen.     1858-65. 
Gottschick,  J.     Hus',  Luther's  und   Zwingli's  Lehre  von  der  Kirche.     Zeitschr.  fiir 

Kirchengesch.  viii  (1886-7),  pp.  345-394  and  543-616. 
Harnack,  A.     Dogmengeschichte,  Ft   ii,   Bk  iii,   Chap.   iv.     In  English  Translation  : 

vol.  VI,  pp.  168  ff.     London.     1899. 
Heitz.     Ueber  den  Taufritus  der  refonnirten  Kirche  der  Schweiz.     Theolog  Zeitschrift 

aus  d.  Schweiz.     Vol.  iii.     1886,  pp.  158-167. 
Hospinianus,  R.     Historia  Sacramentaria.     2  vols.     Geneva.     1681.     (Vol.  ii,  De  ori- 

gine  et  progressu  controversiae  sacramentariae,  reaches  to  1612.) 
Hundeshagen,  K.  B.     Die  Konflikte  des  Zwinglianismus,  Lutherthums  und  Calvinismus 

in  den  Bernischen  Landkirchen,    1522-1558,   nach   meist  ungedruckten  Quellen 

dargestellt.     Bern.     1842. 

Beitrage  zur  Kirchenverfassungsgeschichte  und  Kirchenpolitik,  insbesondere  des 

Protestantismus.     Wiesbaden.     Vol.  i.     1864. 

Kiigelgen,  E.  W.  von.     Die  Ethik  Huldreich  Zwinglis.     Leipzig.     1902. 

Loofs,  F.     Leitfaden  zum  Studium  der  Dogmengeschichte.     3rd  ed.     Halle.     1893. 

Loscher,  V.  E.     Historia  Motuum  (between  Lutherans  and  Reformed).      1st  edition, 

1723-24;  2nd  edition,  by  J.  R.  Kiesling.     Leipzig  und  Schwabach.     1770. 
Miiller,  E.  F.  K.     Die  Bekenntnisschriften  der  reformierten  Kirche  —  in  authentischen 

Texten,  pp.  1-100.     Leipzig.     1908. 
Niemeyer,    II.    A.     Collectio    Confessionum    in     ecclesiis    reformatis    publicatarum. 

Leipzig.     1840. 
Richter,  Aera.  L.     Die  evangelischen  Kirchenordnnngen  des  sechzehnten  Jahrhunderts. 

Urkuuden  und  Regesten  zur  Geschichte  des  Rechts  und  der  Verfassung  der  evan- 
gelischen Kirche  in  Deutschland,  pp.  21  ff.  and  134  ff.     2  vols.     Weimar.     1846. 
Richter,  L.     Geschichte  der  evangelischen  Kirchenverfassung  in  Deutschland  (pp.  148- 

166).     Leipzig.     1851. 
Schaff,  Ph.     Bibliotheca  Symbolica.     New  York.     1877. 
Schmid,  H.     Der  Kampf  der  Lutherischen  Kirche  um  Luthers  Lehre  vom  Abendmahl 

im  Reformationszeitalter.     Leipzig.     1868. 
Schweizer,  A.     Die  protestantischen  Centraldogmen  in  ihrer  Entwicklung  innerhalb 

der  reformierten  Kirche.     Zurich.     1854-6. 
Sigwart,  C.     Ul.  Zwingli,  der  Charakter  seiner  Theologie  mit  besonderer  Rticksicht 

auf  Picus  von  Mirandola.     Stuttgart  and  Hamburg.     1855. 
Stahl,  F.  J.     Die  Lutherische  Kirche  und  die  Union.     Berlin.     1860. 
Thoniasius-Seeberg.     Dogmengeschichte   des   Mittelalters  und  der  Neuzeit.     Vol.  ii, 

pp.  395-421  and  520-637.     Erlangen  and  Leipzig.     1889. 

{^Se,e  also  Bibliographies  to  Chapters   V-VIII,  and  to  Chapter  XI.) 


CHAPTER   XI 

CALVIN 
I.     BIBLIOGRAPHIES 

Catalogus  operum  Calvini.     loannis  Calvini  Opera  quae  supersunt  omnia.     Vol.  lix, 

pp.  462-512. 
Catalogus  operura  quae  sunt  de  Calvino.     loauuis  Calvini  Opera  quae  supersunt  omnia. 

Vol.  LIX,  pp.  517-586. 
Haag,  Eug.  et  Em.     La  France  protestante.  .  .  .     Tome  in,  pp.  143-162.     Paris.     1852. 
Herzog-Plitt,    J.    J.      Realencyklopiidie    fiir    protestantische   Theologie   und    Kirche. 

Vol.  Ill,  pp.  77-79.     Leipzig.     1878.     Ibid.     3rd  ed.,  edited  by  Hauck.     Vol.  iii, 

pp.  654,  655.     Leipzig.     1897. 
Rilliet,  A.     Bibliographie  de  la  vie  de  Calvin.     Paris.     1864. 
SchaflF,  Ph.     History  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  vii,  pp.  223-231.    New  York.     1892. 

Edinburgh.     1893. 
Senebier,  J.     Auteurs  k  consulter  sur  la  vie  de  Calvin.     Histoire  litt^raire  de  Geneve, 

pp.  260-265.     Geneva.     1786. 


II.     ORIGINAL    AUTHORITIES 

Calvini,   loannis,  Opera  quae  supersunt  omnia,     lix  vols.     Corpus  Reformatorum. 

Vols.  xxix-LXXVii.     Brunswick  and  Berlin.     1869-97. 
Works  of  Calvin  published  by  the  Calvin  Translation  Society.     Edinburgh.     1843-55. 
Bonnet,  J.     Lettres  fran^aises  de  Jean  Calvin.     2  vols.     Paris.     1854.     Translation : 

Letters  of  John   Calvin,     i,    ii,  by   Constable.     Edinburgh.     1855.     m,    iv,    by 

Gilchrist.     Philadelphia.     1858. 
Herminjard,  A.-L.     Correspondance  des  Rfeformateurs  dans  les  pays  de  langue  fran- 

9aise.    9  vols.     Basel,  Geneva,  Lyons.     1866-97. 


III.     BIOGRAPHIES 
A.     General 

Adam,    Melchior.      Vita   Calvini.      In  Vitae    theologorum,    pp.  6a-113.      Frankfort. 

1618. 
Alexander,  W.  Lindsay.     Calvin.     Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  edd.  vni  and  ix. 
Audin,  V.    Histoire  de  la  vie,  des  ouvrages  et  des  doctrines  de  Calvin,     lat  ed.     Paris. 

1841.     Later  ed.  1873.     Translation  :    Gill,  Life  of  Calvin.     London.     1850. 
Bayle,  P.  Calvin.     Dictionnaire  historique  et  critique.     Vol  i.     Rotterdam.     1696. 

779 


780  Calvin 


Beza,  Th.     Vita  Calvini.     Corpus  Reformatorum,  xlix.     1879.     Translation :  Bever- 

idge,  Calvin's  Tracts,  vol.  i.     Transl.  Soc.  Edinburgh,  1844. 
Bfeze,  Th.  de.     Discours  contenant  en  brief  Thistoire  et  mort  de  Maistre  Jean  Calvin. 

Geneva.     1564.     And  in  the  Corpus  Reform.,  ut  supra. 
Bungener,  F.     Calvin,  sa  vie,  son  oeuvre,  et  ses  Merits.     Paris.     1862-3.    Translated 

into  English,  German,  and  Dutch  in  1863,  and  in  1877  into  Danish. 
Dardier,  Ch.     Calvin  le  r^formateur.     Encyclopedic  des  sciences  religieuses,  ii,  529- 

545.     Paris.     1877. 
Diehl,  K.  v.      J.  Kalvin,  Teolog  i  Reformator  (Zwiastun  Ewangeliczny).     Warsaw, 

1864-5. 
Doumergue,  E.    Jean  Calvin.     Les  hommes  et  les  choses  de  son  temps.      Lausanne, 

Vol.  I,  La  jeuuesse.     1899.     Vol  ii,    Les  premiers  Essais.     1902.     [This  work 

is  still  incomplete;    vol.  ii  ends  with  Calvin's  return  to  Geneva.] 
Dyer,  T.  H.     The  life  of  John  Calvin.     London.     1849. 

Funk.     Calvin.     Wetzer  uud  Welte :   Kirchenlexikou,  ii,  1728-44.     Freiburg.     1883. 
Goguel,  G.     Le  r^formateur  de  la  France  et  de  Geneve,  Jean  Calvin.     Toul.     1863. 
Guizot,   F.  P.  G.     La  vie  de  quatre   grands   Chretiens :  Calvin,  pp.    149-376.     Paris. 

1873.     Translation  :  Loudon.     1881. 
Maag,  E.     Vie  de  Calvin,  a  I'usage  des  6coles  protestantes.     Paris.     1840. 

E.  C.     La  France  protestante,  iii,  109-162.     Paris.     1852. 

Henry,  P.     Das  Leben  Calvins.     3  vols.    Hamburg.    1835-44.    Translation :   Stebbing, 

Life  and  Times  of  Calvin.     2  vols.     London.     1849. 
Herzog,  J.  J.     Calvin.     Realencyklopadie  flir  prot.  Theologie  und  Kirche.     Leipzig. 

1st  ed.     1854,  2nd  ed.  1878. 
Mackenzie,  J.     Memoirs  of  the  life  and  writings  of  John  Calvin.    London.     1818. 
Stahelin,  E.     Calvins  Leben  und  ausgewahlte  Schriften.     Elberfeld.     1863. 

R.     Calvin.     Realencyklopadie   fiir  pi'ot.   Theologie  und  Kirche,  m,  654-683. 

3rd  ed.    Leipzig.     1897. 


B.     Special  Periods 
1.      Toiith  and  Conversion 

Couard-Lys,  E.     Documents  in^dits  relatifs  k  Calvin.     Bull,  du  comit6  des  travaux 

historiques   et  scientiflques.    Section  d'hist.  et  de  philologie,  pp.  7-13.     Paris. 

1884. 
Dalton,  H.     Calvins  Bekehrung.     Deutsche  evang.  Blatter.     Halle.     1893. 
Desmay,  J.     Remarques  sur  la  vie  de  Jean  Calvin,  h^r^siarque,  tiroes  des  Registres  de 

Noyon.     Rouen.     1621-57.      Archives   curieuses   de  I'histoire  de  France,  v,  pp. 

387-398.     Paris.     1835. 
Lang,  A.     Die  Bekehrung  Johannes  Calvins.     Studien  zur  Geschichte  der  Theologie 

und  Kirche.     Vol.  ii.     Pt  i.     Leipzig.     1897. 
Lecoultre,  H.     La  conversion  de  Calvin.     Rev.  de  th^ol.  et  de  philosophic,  pp.  5-30. 

Lausanne.     1890. 
Lefranc,  A.     La  Jeuuesse  de  Calvin.     Paris.     1888. 
Levasseur,  J.     Aunales  de  I'^glise  cath^drale  de  Noyon.     Paris.     1633. 


2.     Calvin  in  Geneva 

Bolsec,  Hier.  Histoire  de  la  Vie,  Moeurs,  Actes,  Constance  et  Mort  de  Jean  Calvin 
jadis  ministre  de  Geneve.  Lyons.  1577.  A  Latin  version  was  published  at 
Cologne,  1580.  The  book  has  often  been  republished  [though  its  animus  is  too 
marked  to  allow  of  its  being  trusted]  ;  a  later  edition  with  introduction  and  notes 
is  by  L.  F.  Chastel.     Lyons.     1875. 


Bihlioijruplnj  781 


Cornelius,  C.  V.     Historische  Arbeiten,  vornehmlich  zar  Refonuationszelt.    Leipzig. 

Galiffe,  J.  A.     Mattiriaux  pour  I'histoire  de  Gen6ve.     2  vols.     Geneva.     1829. 
Kampschulte,  F.  W.     Johann  Calvin,  seine  Kirche  und  sein  Staat  in  Genf.     Vol.  i 

1869.     Vol.  II.     Leipzig.     1899. 
Pierson,  A.     Studien  over  J.  K.     Amsterdam.      1881.     (De   Omwentellng  te  Gen6ve 

voor  K.,  pp.   17-57.     K.'s  Geloofsverandering,  pp.  58-109.     K.  in  de  eerste  helft 

van  1536,  pp.  243-256.)     Nieuwe  Studien.     Amsterdam.     1883.     Kalvin  en  Caroli, 

pp.  17-89.     Kalvin's  Nederlaag  in  1538,  pp.  90-149. 
Studien  over  J.   K.       1540-2.     Ser.   in.     Amsterdam.      1891.     (K.  naar  Geneve 

Teruggeroepen,   pp.    1-42.     K.    en   de   troebelen   te    Neucliatel,    pp.    43-83.     De 

eerste   maanden   te    Genfeve,   pp.    84-122.     Caroli    naar   de    Nededaag,   pp.  123- 

184.) 
Roget,   A.     Histoire  du    peuple  de  Geneve  depuis   la  R^forme  jusqu'4    I'Escalade. 

Geneva.     1870-83. 

3.     Death 

F.  V.     La  Mort  de  Calvin.     La  Croix.     Paris.     1864. 

Zahn,  A.    Die  beiden  letzten  Lebensjahre  von  Calvin.     Leipzig.     1895. 


4.     Private  life 

Bonnet,  J.      Idelette  de    Bure.      Bull.      1856,   pp.   638-646.      lEtrennes  cbr^tiennes. 

Geneva,  1857,  pp.  104-123.     R^cits  du  16«  si^cle,  Paris,  1864,  pp.  75-100. 
Les  amities  de  Calvin.     Bull.     1864,  pp.  89-96.  —  Ibid.    1869,  pp.  257-268,  449- 

462.     R^cits  du  16<^  si^cle.  Paris,  1864,  pp.  101-175,  319-352. 
Gaberel.   J.     La  vie  intime  de  Calvin.      Souvenirs    religieux,    pp.    273-293.     Toul. 

1865. 
GaliflFe,   J.    A.     Notices  g^n^alogiques  sur  les    families    G^nevoises.     pp.    106-113. 

Geneva.     1836. 
Hausrath.  A.     Calvins  Verheirathung.     Leipzig.     1883. 
Lang.  A.     Das  hausliche  Lelien  Johann  Calvins.     Beilage  zur  AUg.  Zeitung,  nos.  137, 

138,  140,  142.     Muuicli.      1893. 
Oilier,  D.     Le  manage  de  Calvin.     Rev.  chr^tieuue,  1892,  ii,  pp.  210-226. 


C.     Thought  .\xd  Tiikoi.ogy 

Baur,  F.  C.     Christliche  Dograengeschichte.     Vol.  iii.     Leipzig.     1867. 

Die  christliche  Lehre  von  der  Dreieinigkeit  und  Mcnschwcrdung  Gottes.  .  .  . 

Vol.  III.     Tiibingen.     1843. 
Bonnet,  J.     Le  traits  De  dementia.    Rev.  chr^t.  1857,  pp.  219-22. 
Cunningham,  W.     The  reformers  and  tlie  theology  of  the  Reformation,  pp.  292-525. 

Edinburgh.     1862. 
Gass,  W.     Geschichte  der  prot.  Dogmatik,  i.     pp.  99-124.     1S54. 
Kostlin,  J.     Calvins  Institutio  nacli  Form  und  Inhalt  in  ihrcr  gi'schiclitliciu-n  Ilntwick- 

lung.     Studien  und  Kritiken,  pp.  7-62.  410-486.     Gotha.     1868. 
Lecoultre,  II.     Calvin  d'apr^s  son  commentaire  sur  le  De  dementia.     Rev.  dc  th^ol. 

et  de  phil.,  pp.  51-77.     Lau.sanne.     1891. 
Loofs,  Friedrich.     Die  lehrhaftc  Auflassung   des  cvangelischcn  Cliristentums  dun  li 

Calvin.     Dogmengeschichte,  pp.  390-401. 
Rilliet,  A.     Introduction  hist,  au  Cat^chisme  et  .\  la  confession  de  fois,  1537.     Le  pre- 
mier cat^chisme  de  Calvin,  i-xcviii.     Paris.     1878. 
Rougemont,  H.  de.     L'Inst.  chr6t.  de  Calvin  dans  sa  redaction  primitive.     Lt<  Chrftlnn 

evang6lique,  pp.  77-83.     Lausanne.     1886. 


782  Calvin 


Schneckenburger,  M.    Vergleichende  Vorstellung    des  lutherischen  und  ref.    Lehr- 

begriffs.    2  vols.     Stuttgart.     1855. 
Schweizer,   A.     Die  prot.    Centraldogmen  in  Ihrer  Entwicklung  iuuerhalb  der   ref. 

Kirche.     i,  pp.  150-249  et  passim.    Zurich.     1854. 


IV.     HISTORY   OF   THE   SIXTEENTH  CENTURY  IN  RELATION 
TO   CALVIN 

Baird,  H.  M.     History  of  the  rise  of  the  Huguenots.     2  vols.     London.     1880. 

Bez,  G.     Les  luttes  religieuses  en  France  et  Calvin  d'aprfes  sa  correspondance.     Toul. 

1887. 
Histoire  Eccl^siastique  des  ^glises  R^formges  au  Royaume  de  France.     1580.     Later 

ed.,  by  Baum  and  Cunitz.     3  vols.     1883-9. 
Merle  d'Aubigne,  J.   H.     Histoire  de  la  reformation  en  Europe  au  temps  de  Calvin. 

Paris.     1863-78.     Translation.     History  of  the  Reformation  in  Europe  in  the  time 

of  Calvin.     London.     1863-. 
Polenz,  C.  von.     Geschichte  des   franzosischen   Calvinismus.     Gotha.     i.     1857.     ii, 

1859. 
Puaux,  F.     Histoire  de  la  rfiformation  fran^aise.     Paris.     1857-9. 

See  also  previous  section  (Biographies,   General). 


V.     CALVIN   AND    HERESY 

Brunnemann,  K.     M.    Servetus.     Eine  aktenmassige   Darstelluug  des    1553   in  Genf 

gegen  ihn  gefiihrten  Criminalprozesses.     Berlin.     1865. 
Buisson,  F.     Sebastien  Castellion,  sa  vie  et  sou  oeuvre.     2  vols.     Paris.     1892. 
Cologny,  L.    L'antitrinitairisme  k  Geneve.     Geneva.     1873. 
Dardier,  C.     Michel  Servet  d'aprfes  ses  plus  recents   biographes.     Revue  historique. 

XI.     Paris.     1879. 
Florimond  de  Raemond.     L'histoire  de  la  naissance,  progrez  et  decadence  de  I'h^r^sie. 

Paris.     1605. 
Rilliet,   A.     Relation  du   procfes   criminel  intents  h  Genfeve  en   1553   contre   Servet. 

Mem.  et  documents  de  la  societe  d'histoire  et  d'archeologie  de  Geneve,  pp.  1-160. 

Geneva.     1844. 
Tollin,  H.     Charakterbild  M.  Servets.     Berliu.     1876. 
Servet  iiber  Predigt,  Taufe  und  Abendmahl.     Theologische  Studien  und  Kriti- 

ken.     Gotha.     1881. 
Willis,  R.     Servetus  and  Calvin.     London.     1877. 


VI.     CALVIN   AS   EDUCATOR 

Borgeaud,  Ch.     Calvin  Fondateur  de  I'Academie  de  Genfeve.     Paris.     1897. 

Damagnez,  A.     Influence  de  Calvin  sur  I'instruction.     Montauban.     1886.     This  is  a 

very  meritorious  example  of  the  theses  published  at  Montauban.     Those  dealing 

with  Calvin  are  an  immense  multitude,  and  may  be  said  to  cover  the  whole  field 

of  his  thought  and  activity. 
Heiz,   J.     Calvin's   Thiitigkeit  fiir  die    Schule.      Zeitschrift    fiir    praktische    Theol. 

Frankfort.     1889. 
Schenck,  J.  C.     Johann  Calvin's  Verdienste  auf  dem  Gebiete  der  Erziehung  und  des 

Unterrichts.     Frankfort.     1863. 


Bibliography  1K\ 


VII.     CALVIN   AS   STATESMAN 

Biesterveld,  P.  Calviii  gewaardeerd  in  sijne  politieke  beginselcn.  Tijdsdirift  voor 
geref.  Theol.  Kampen,  11)00,  pp.  272-27G. 

Choisy,  E.     La  theocratic  a  Geneve  an  temps  de  Calvin.     Geneva.     1897. 

Hundeshagen,  K.  B.  Ueber  den  Einlhiss  des  Calvinismus  auf  die  Idee  voni  Staat  \\m\ 
staatsburgerlicher  Freiheit.     Bern.     1842. 

Merle  d'Aubigufi.     Jean  Calvin,  nn  des  fondateurs  des  libertfis  modernes.     Paris.     18G8. 

Tissofc,  F.  Les  relations  entre  I'jfcglise  et  I'ifetat  i  Genfeve  an  temps  de  Calvin.  Lau- 
sanne.    1874. 

Weber,  G.  Geschichtliche  Darstellung  des  Calvinismus  ira  Verhiiltniss  zuni  Staat  in 
Genf  und  Frankreich.     Heidelberg.     183(5. 


VIII.     COMPARATIVE   ESTIMATES 

Beard,  C.     The  Reformation  of  the  10th  century.    London.     1883. 

Gaberel,  J.     Calvin  et  Rousseau.     Geneva.     1878. 

Viguet,  C.  O.     Etude  sur  le  caractfire  distinctif  de  Calvin.     Geneva.     1864. 


IX.     GENERAL   CHURCH   HISTORY 

Baur,  F.  C.     Geschichte  der  christlichen  Kirche.     Vol.  iv.     Tubingen.     1863. 

Fisher,  G.  P.     The  Reformation.     London.     1873. 

Gieseler,  J.  C.  L.     Lehrbuoh  der  Kin-hengeschichte.     Bonn.     1855. 

Hardwick,  C.     A  history  of  the  Christian  Church  during  the  Reformation.     London. 

1873. 
Hase,  K.  A.     Kirchengeschichte.     Leipzig.     1886. 

Hausser,  L.     The  period  of  the  Reformation.     2  vols.     London.     1873. 
Kurtz,  J.  H.     Church  History.     Transl.  by  J.  Macpherson.     Vol.  ii.     London.     1890. 
MoUer,  W.     Kirchengeschichte.     Vol.  iii.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1894. 
Rothe,  Richard.    Kirchengeschichte.     Heidelberg.     1875. 


X.     CALVIN    AND   FRENCH    LITERATURE 

G^rusez,  E.     Histoire  de  la  littfirature  fran^aise.    Paris.     1872. 

Histoire  de  I'eloquence  politique  et  religieuse  en  France,  pp.  192-285.     1837. 

Nisard,  D.     Histoire  de  la  littfirature  franqaise.     Paris.     1844. 

Petit  de  JuUeville,  L.     Histoire  de  la  langue  et  de  la  littfirature  fran^aise  (pp.  319-354. 

Theologiens  et  predioateurs).     Paris.     1897. 
Sayous,  A.     :fetudes  littSraires  sur  les  ecrivains  franc^ais  de  la  Reformation.     Paris. 

1841. 


CHAPTER   XII 

THE   CATHOLIC    SOUTH 
MANUSCRIPTS 

Pietro  Speziali  de  Gratia  Dei  is  still  in  ms.  in  the  St  Mark's  Library  at  "Venice. 

Many  letters  and  papers  of  Renee  are  in  the  Turin  archives,  at  Rome,  Florence,  and 
Modena. 

Carnesecchi's  process  is  in  the  Archives  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  and  Caracciolo's 
Life  of  Pius  IV,  in  many  transcripts,  at  Rome  (Barberini),  Naples,  and  London  (Brit. 
Mus.  Harl.). 

The  process  of  Carranza  is  in  the  Library  of  the  Real  Academia  de  la  Historia  at 
Madrid. 

The  documents  of  the  Inquisition  at  Udine,  Modena,  Naples,  Palermo,  and  elsewhere 
have  not  yet  been  entirely  used  for  historical  purposes. 


PUBLISHED   DOCUMENTS 

Artigny,   A.    G.    de.     Nouveaux  Memoires  d'histoire.     Paris.     1749.     Vol.  n.     [The 

process  against  Serveto  at  Vienne.] 
Beccadelli,  L.  ^Monumenti.     Ed.  G.  Morandi.     3  vols.    Bologna.     1797,  1799,  1804. 
Berabo,  P.  (Card.).     Opere.     Ed.  Morelli.     12  vols.     Milan.     1808-10. 
Biblioteca  della  Riforraa  Italiana.     1883  f. 
Boehmer,  E.     Epistolae  quaedam  Joannis   Sturmii   et  Hispanorum   qui  Argentorati 

degerunt.     1872. 
Cabre,  A.     Cartas  de  San  Ignacio  de  Loyola.     Madrid.     1874  etc. 
Caracciolo,  A.     De  vita  Panli  IV  collectanea  historica.     Cologne.     1612. 
Castelvetro,  L.     Opere,  colla  vita  dell'  autore  scritta  dal  L.  A.  Muratori.     Bern.     1727. 
Contarini,  G.     Regesten  u.   Briefe  des  Cardinals  C.     Ed.  F.   Dittrich.     Braunsberg. 

1881. 
— —    Opera.     Paris.     1571. 
Crespin,  J.     Histoire  des  Martyrs  persecutes  et  mis  a  mort  pour  la  verite  de  I'lfevangile. 

158.5.     New  edition.     Toulouse.     1885. 
Documentos  ineditos  para  la  historia  de  Espaiia.     Vols,  v,  x,  xi,  xl,  lxviii.     1842  etc. 
Doellinger,  I.  von.     Beitrage  zur  Geschichte.     Vol.  i.     Ratisbon.     1862. 
Kuzinas,  F.  de  (Dryander).     Epistolae  quinquaginta.     In  Kahnis's  Zeitschrift  fiir  die 

historische  Theologie,  1870,  pp.  387  fl".     Leipzig. 
Memoires.     Ed.  Campan.     2  vols.     Brussels.     1862-3.     German  translation  with 

notes  by  E.  Boehmer.     Bonn.     1893. 
Fazy,  H.     Proces  de  Valentin  Gentilis  et  de  Nicolas  Gallo.     In  Memoires  de  I'lnstitut 

national  Genevois.     Vol.  xiv.     Geneva.     1878. 
Ferrero,  E. ,  and  Miiller,  G.     Carteggio  di  Vittoria  Colonna.     Turin.     1889. 

784 


Bibliography  785 

Fontana,  B.     Documenti  Vaticani  contro  1'  eresia  luterana  in  Italia.     Archivio  ilt-lla 

R.  Soc.  Rom.  di  Storia  Patria.     Vol  xv.     Rome.     1892. 
Friedensburg,  W.     Nuutiaturen  des  Vergerio.     Goliia.     1892. 

Nuntiaturen  des  Morotie.     Ciotha.     Ks'.tL'. 

Frizzi,   A.     Meraorie   per  la   storia   di   Ferrara.      Ed.    Ladercln.     Vol.    iv.      Ferrara 

1848. 
Galiffe,  J.  B.  G.    Le  Refuge  itallen  de  Genfeve  au.\  xvi^  ct  xvir  Si^cles.     1881. 
Gar,   T.     Relazioni  della  Corte  di  Roma.     E.   Alb6ri,    Relazioni   dcgli   aniijastiatori 

Veneti,  Sei-.  ii,  vols,  iii,  iv.     Florence.     1846,  1857. 
Gibbings,  R.    Trial  and  Martyrdom  of  P.  Carnesecchi.     Dnblin.     1856. 

The  Roman  Index  Expurgatorius.     Dublin.     1837. 

Graziani,  A.  M.     Vita  Coumiendoni  Cardinalis.     Paris.     1669. 

Henriques,  G.  J.  C.  [W.  J.  C.  Henry].     lueditos  Goesianos.     Vol.  ii.     (0  processo  nu 

Inquisigao.)     Lisbon.     1899. 
Herminjard,  A.  L.     Correspondance  des  R^fonnateurs.     Esp.  vols.  iv.  vii.    Geneva. 

1878,  1886. 
Kausler,  E..  and  Schott,  T.     Briefwechsel  zwischen  Chr.  Ilerzog  von  Wiirttembcrg  uml 

P.  P.  Vergerius.     Stuttgart.     1875. 
Laemmer,  H.     Monumenta  Vaticana.     Freiburg  in  Breisgau.     1861. 
Leva,  G.  de.     Eretici  di  Cittadella.     Atti  dell'  Instituto  Veneto,  pp.  679-772.     Venifp. 

1872-3. 
Loaysa,  G.  de.     Briefe  an  Kaiser  Karl  V.     Ed.  G.  Heine.     [Spanish  text  and  German 

translation  published  separately.]     Berlin.     1848. 
Miscellanea  di  Storia  Italiana.     Vols,  vi,  x,  xv.     1869  etc. 
Noltenius,  G.  L.     Vita  Olympiae  Moratae.      Ed.  J.  G.  V.  Hesse.     Frankfort  on  the 

Oder.     1775. 
Paleario,  A.     Opera.     Ed.  F.  A.  Hallbauer.     Jena.     1728. 

Pastor,  L.     Correspondenz  des  Cardinals  Contarini.     In  Historisches  Jahrbnch  i.      ISSO. 
Philip  II.     Correspondance  sur  les  affaires  des  Pays  Bas.     Ed.  L.  P.  Gacliard.     Vols. 

I,  II.     Brussels.     1848. 
Pole,  R.  (Card.).     Epistolae.     Ed.  A.  M.  Quirini.     5  vols.     Brescia.     1744-45-48-52. 
Rebello  da  Silva,  L.  A.     Corpo  Diploraatico  Portuguez.     Vols,  ii.-v.     Lisbon.     1865- 

68-70-74. 
Reformistas  antiguos  espanoles.     20  vols.     (A  description   by  Wilkcns   in   Brieger's 

Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengeschichte  IX  341.     Gotha.     1847-80.) 
Reusch,  F.  H.     Die  Indices  librorum  prohibitorum   des  sechszehnten  Jahrhunderts. 

Stuttgart.     1887. 
Reyna,  Cassiodoro  de.     Epistolae  xiii.     Ed.  Boehraer.     In  Kahnis,  Zeitschrift  fiir  die 

historische  Theologie  XL,  285  tf.     Leipzig. 
Ribadeneira,  P.  de.     Vida  del  P.  Ignacio  de  Loyola,  etc.     Madrid.     1594. 
Rilliet,  J.  H.  A.     Relation  du  proces  intents  h  Geneve  en  1553  centre  Michel  Servet. 

1844.     Reprinted  in  Calvin's  Works,     viii.     1870. 
Sadoleto,  J.     Opera.     4  vols.    Venice.     1737-8. 
Sanuto,  M.     Diarii.     Venice.     1879  etc. 
Sepulveda,  J.  G.  de.     Opera.     4  vols.     Madrid.     1780. 
Serristori,  A.    Legazioni.    Florence.     1853. 

State  Papers,  Calendar  of  Venetian,     v.     Ed.  by  Rawdon  Brown.     London.     1873. 
Valdes,  A.  de.     Litterae  xl  ineditae.     Ed.  E.  Boehmer.     In  Homenaje  a  Men6ndc7.  y 

Pelayo.     Ed.  by  Jiian  Valera.     Vol.  i.     Madrid.     1899. 
J.  de.     Trataditos.     Ed.  E.  Boehmer.    Bonn.    1880.    And  other  tracts  of  VaUK-s 

edited  by  Boehmer. 
Vergerio,  P.  P.     Opera.     Ttibingcn.     1563. 

Wiffen,  B.  B.     Life  and  v/ritings  of  Juan  Vald6s,  with  a  translation  of  his  CX.     Con- 
siderations by  J.  T.  Betts.     London.     1865. 


60 


786  The  Catholic  South 


PRINCIPAL   HISTORIES 

Boehmer,  E.  Bibliotheca  Wiffeniaua,  Spanish  Reformers  of  two  Centuries  from  1520. 
2  vols,  publislied.     Strassburg  and  London.     1874,  1883. 

Cantu,  C.     Gli  Eretici  d'  Italia.     3  vols.     Turin.     1865-7. 

Carvalho,  A.  Herculano  de.  Historia  da  Origera  e  do  Estabeleciraento  da  Inquisigao 
em  Portugal.     3  vols.     Lisbon.     1864,  1867,  1872. 

Castro,  A.  de.  Historia  de  los  Protestantes  espaiioles.  Cadiz.  1851.  Eng.  transla- 
tion by  T.  Parker.     London.     1851. 

Comba,  E.     I  nostri  Protestanti.     2  vols,  published.     Florence.     1881,  1897. 

Gerdes,  D.     Specimen  Italiae  Reformatae.     Leyden.     1765. 

Leva,  G.  de.     Storia  Documentata  di  Carlo  V.     Vol.  iii.     Venice.     1867. 

Llorente,  J.  A.     Histoire  critique  de  ITnquisition  d'Espagne.     4  vols.     Paris.     1818. 

McCrie,  T.  History  of  the  Reformation  in  Italy.  Edinburgh.  1827.  New  edition, 
1855. 

History  of  the  Reformation  in  Spain.     Edinburgh.     1829.     New  edition,  1855. 

Men^ndez  y  Pelayo,  M.     Historia  de  los  Heterodoxos  EspaSoles.     3   vols.     Madrid. 

1880-2. 
Philippsoii,  M.     Zeitalter  von  Philipp  II.  und  Elizabeth.     2  vols.     Berlin.     1882-3. 

La  Contre-Rfivolution  religieuse  du  xvi"  sifecle.     1884. 

Schafer,  E.     Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  des  spanischen  Protestantismus  und  der  Inquisi- 
tion.   3  vols.     Gutersloh.     1902. 
"Wilkens,  C.  A.     Geschichte  des  spanischen  Protestantismus.     Gutersloh.     1888. 


SPECIAL   TREATISES 

{Many  of  the  following  books  contain  documents  previously  unpublished.) 

Agostini,  A.     Pietro  Carnesecchi  e  il  Movimento  Valdesiano.     Florence.     1899. 
Amabili,  L.     II  santo  Officio  della  Inquisizione  in  Napoli.     2  vols.     Citt^  di  Castello. 

1892. 
Amante,  B.     Giulia  Gonzaga.     Bologna.     1896. 
Antonio,  N.    Bibliotheca  Hispana  Nova.     2  vols.     Madrid.     1783-8. 
Barros  y  Sousa,  M.  F.  de.     See  Santarem. 

Battistella,  A.     II  s.  Officio  e  la  Riforma  in  Friuli.     (With  documents.)    Udine.     1895. 
Benrath,  K.     tjber  die  Quellen   der  italienischen   Reformations-Geschichte.     Bonn. 

1876. 

Bernardino  Ochino  von  Siena.     Leipzig.     1875.     New  Edition.     1892.     English 

translation  without  the  documents.     London.     1876. 

Geschichte  der  Reformation  in  Venedig.     Halle.     1887. 

Julia  Gonzaga.     Halle.     1900. 

Bernino,  D.     Istoi'ia  di  tutte  1'  Eresie.     iv.     Venice.     1745. 

Bertolotti,  A.     Martiri  del  libero  pensiero.     1891. 

Bock,  F.  S.     Historia  Antitrinitariorum.     Vol.  ii.     Konigsberg  and  Leipzig.     1784. 

Boehmer,  E.     Franzisca  Hernandez  und  Frai  Franzisco  Ortiz.     Leipzig.     1865. 

Bonnet,  J.     Vie  d'Olympia  Morata.     3rd  ed.     Paris.     1856. 

Boverio  da  Saluzzo,  Z.     Annali  de'  Fratri  minori  Cappucini.     Venice.     1643. 

Braun,  W.     Cardinal  Gasparo  Contarini.     1903. 

Bruni,  L.     Cosimo  I.  de'  Medici  e  il  processo  d'  eresia  del  Carnesecchi.     Turin.     1891. 

Caballero,  F.  A.     Vida  de  Melchor  Cano.     Madrid.     1871. 

Juan  y  Alfonso  Valdfis.     Madrid.     1875. 

Cantu,  C.     Storia  degli  Italiani.     Vol.  x.     1876. 


Bibliography  78' 


Cantii,  C.     Italian!  illustri.    Vol.  n.     Milan.     1879. 

Carrasco,  M.     Alfonso  et  Juan  de  Vald^s.     Geneva.     1880. 

Cecchetti,  B.     La  republica  di  Venezia  e  la  corte  di   Roma.     2  vols.     Venice.     1874. 

Christ,  E.     Spanische  Glaubenshelden.     Basel.     1886. 

Coligny,  L.     L'antitrinitarianisme  k  Genfeve  an  temps  de  Calvin.     1873. 

Cuccoli,  E.     M.  Antonio  Flaminio.     Bolojjna.     1897. 

Davari,  S.     Cenni  storici  intorno  al  Tribuuale  della  Inquisizione  in  Mautova.     Archivio 

Storico  Lombardo  vi.     Milan.     1879. 
Dittricli,  F.     Gasparo  Contarini.     Braunsberg.     1885. 
Doumergue,  E.     Jean  Calvin.     Vol.  ii.     Lausanne.     1903. 

Droin,  M.    Histoire  de  la  Reformation  en  Espagne.    2  vols.    Lausanne  and  Paris.    1880. 
Elze,  Th.     Geschichte  der  protestantisclien  Bewegungen  in  Venedig.     Bielefeld.     1883. 
Feliciangeli,  B.    Notizie  suUa  Caterina  Cibo.     Caraerino.     1891. 
Ferrai,  E.     Studi  Storici,  pp.  88-173.     1892. 

Fontana,  B.     Renata  di  Francia.     3  vols.     (Vol.  ii.     Documents.)     Rome.     1889-99. 
Gerdes,  D.     Scrinium  Antiquariura  sive  Miscellanea  Groningana.     8  vols.     Bremen. 

1749-65. 
Hoefler,  C.  von.     Papst  Adrian  VI.     Vienna.     1880. 
Hoermann,  A.     Francisco  de  Enzinas  und  sein  Kreis.     1902. 
Hubert,  F.     Vergerio's  publizistische  Thatiglteit.     Gottingen.     1893. 
Jahrbucher  fiir  protestantische   Tlieologie.     iii.     Mase  on  Carnesecchi   and   Altieri. 

IV.     Benrath  on  Caratt'a,  etc.     Leipzig.     1877-78. 
Jensen,  O.     Gio.  Pietro  Caraffa  og  de  religiose  Stromninger  i  Italien  paa  bans  Tid. 

Copenhagen.     1880. 
Lafuente,  M.     Historia  general  de  Espafia.     Vol.  xm.     Madrid.     1854. 
La  Fuente,  V.  de.      Historia  Eclesiastica  de  Espana.     Vol.  v,  pp.  205-260.      Madrid. 

1874. 
La  Mantia,  V.     Origine  e  Vicende  dell'  Inquisizione  in  Sicilia.     1886. 
Lassalle,  J.     La  Reforme  en  Espagne  au  xvi*  si6cle.     Paris.     1883. 
Laugwitz,  H.     Bartliolomiius  Carranza.     Kempten.     1870. 
Linde,  A.  van  der.     Michael   Servet,   een    brandoffer  der    gereformeerde  inqnisitie. 

Groningen.     1891. 
Liiben,  W.     Gaetano  di  Tiene.     1883. 
Maurenbrecher,    W.      Studien    und    Skizzen   zur    Geschichte    der    Reformationszeit. 

Leipzig.     1874. 

Geschichte  der  katholischen  Refonnation.     Vol.  i.     Nordlingen.     1880. 

Mossolin,  B.     Giangiorgio  Trissino.     1878. 

Muratori,  L.  A.     Delle  Antichit^  Estensi  ed  Italiane.     2  vols.     Modena.     1717-40. 

Ploncher,  A.     Delia  vita  e  delle  opere  di  Ludovico  Castelvetro.     1879. 

Porta,  P.  D.  R.  de.     Historia  reformationis  ecclesiarum  Raeticarum.     3  vols.     Chur. 

1771,  1776,  1786. 
Ranke,   L.    von.     Die   romischen    Piipste.      I.      Vol.    xxxvii   of   Sanuntliche   Werke. 

Leipzig,  1874  etc. 
Reumont,  A.  von.     Vittoria  Colonna.     Freiburg  i.   B.     1881.     Italian  translation  by 

MuUer  and  Ferrero,  with  additions  by  the  Author.     Turin.     1883. 
Reusch,  F.  H.     Luis  de  L6on.     Bonn.     1873. 

Der  Index  der  verbotenen  Biicher.     Vol.  i.     Bonn.     1883. 

Roberti,  G.  R.     Notizie  storico-critiche  della  vita  de  Francesco  Negri.     1839. 
Rodocanachi,  E.     Ren6e  de  France,  in  G.  Guenard's  Conffirences  de  la  Soci€t6  d'fetudes 

italiennes.     Paris.     1895,  1896. 
Rodrigo,  F.  J.  G.     Historia  de  la  Inqnisicion.     ir.     Madrid.     1877. 
Rosi,  M.     La  Riforma  religiosa  in  Liguria.     Atti  della  SociotA  ligure  di  Storia  Patria. 

XXIV.     Genoa.     1894. 
Sandonnini,  T.     Ludovico  Castelvetro.     Bologna.     1882. 
Santarem,  M.  F.  de  Barros,  y  Sonsa.  Vise,  de,  and   others.    Quadro   Elementar  das 

Rela^oes    Politicas  de    Portugal.     Vols,   x,  xi,  xii.     Paris  and   Lisljon.     1866, 

1869,  1874. 


788  The  Catholic  South 


Schellhorn,  J.  G.     Amoenitates  Literariae.     14  vols.     Frankfort  and  Leipzig.    1725-31. 

Amoen.  Historiae  ecclesiasticae  et  litterariae.     2  vols.     Frankfort  and  Leipzig. 

1737-8. 

De  Consilio  de  emendanda  Ecclesia.     Zurich.     1748. 

Ergotzlichkeiten  aus  der  Kirchenhistorie  und  Literatur.      3   vols.      Ulm   and 

Leipzig.     1761-4. 

Schiess,  T.  Rhetia,  von  F.  Niger  aus  Bassano.  [With  biographical  notice  of  Negri.] 
Chur.     1897. 

Schmidt,  C.     Peter  Martyr  Vermigli.     Elberfeld.     1858. 

Sclopis,  F.     Le  Cardinal  Jean  Morone.     1869. 

Sixt,  C.  H.  Petrus  Paulus  Vergerius.  Brunswick.  1855.  Later  edition  with  ad- 
ditions.    1871. 

Ticknor,  G.     History  of  Spanish  Literature.     3  vols.     4th  ed.     Boston,  Mass.     1872. 

Tiraboschi,  G.     Biblioteca  Modenese.     6  vols.     Modena.     1781-6. 

Storia  della  Litteratura  Italiana.     vii.     Milan.     1822. 

ToUin,  H.     Das  Lehrsystem  M.  Servets.     3  vols.     Giitersloh.     1876-8-9. 

Trechsel,  F.     Die  protestantischen  Antitrinitarier.     2  vols.     Heidelberg.     1839-44. 

Vasconcellos,  J.  de.    Daraiao  de  Goes.     Opoi'to.     1897. 

Vecchiato,  E.     L'  Inquisizioue  sacra  a  Venezia.     1891. 

Young,  M.    Life  and  Times  of  Aonio  Paleario.     2  vols.     London.     1860. 


See  also  Articles,  etc.,  in 


La  Ciudad  de  Dios.     Valladolid.     1887  ff. 

Revista  de  Espana.     Madrid.     1868-1896. 

Rivista  Cristiana.     Florence.     1873-1887. 

Brieger's  Zeitschrift  flir  Kirchengeschichte.     Gotha.     1876  ff. 

Wetzer-Welte,   Kirchenlexicon.     Ed.    F.   Kaulen.     Freiburg    i.   B. 

1886  ff. 
Raumer's  Historisches  Taschenbuch.    Leipzig.     1882. 
Archivio  Storico  Italiano.    xv,  xvi.     Florence.     1856-57. 
Herzog-Hauck,  Real-Encyklopadie  fiir  protestantische  Theologie. 

Leipzig.     1877  f . 

iSee  also  Bibliography  of  Chapter  XVIII.) 


CHAPTER   XIII 


HENRY  VIII 

UNPUBLISHED   MATElilAL 

There  is  but  little  unpublished  matter  of  historical  value  connected  with  the  reipn 
of  Henry  VIII  except  State  papers  in  English  and  foreign  Archives;  and  of  these  full 
notices  will  be  found  in  the  Calendars  publislied  for  the  Master  of  the  Rolls,  with 
specific  references  to  the  sources.  Of  the  collections  in  foreign  countries  the  most 
important  are :  — 

At  Paris.  Archives  du  Ministere  des  Affaires  Etrangferes.  See  heloio  under  Publish«'(l 
Documents,  Kaulek,  J.,  and  Lefevre-Pontalis,  G. 

At  Simancas.  Archivo  General.  Transcripts  by  Bergenroth  are  in  the  British  Mu- 
seum, Add.  MSS.  28572-28595. 

At  Venice,  Milan,  etc.     See  Calendars,  Venetian,  vnder  Published  Documents. 

At  Rome.  Vatican  Archives  and  other  Transcripts  are  in  the  Public  Record  Office. 
Notices  of  the  documents  will  be  found,  eacli  under  its  date,  in  the  Calendar  of 
Letters  and  Papers.  See  also  Laemmer,  II.;  Theiner,  A.;  and  Ehses,  S.,  under 
Published  Documents. 

At  Vienna.  Transcripts  of  the  Archives  relating  to  England  are  in  the  Public  Record 
Office,  and  notices  of  each  separate  document  will  be  found  under  date  in  the 
Letters  and  Papers,  and  also  in  the  Spanish  Calendar. 


ENGLAND 

Early  Ciironiclks  and  Histories 

General 

Chronicle  of  the  Grey  Friars   of  London.      Ed.   by  J.  G.   Nichols.      Camden  Soc. 

1859. 
Chronicle  of  Calais.     Ed.  by  J.  G.  Nichols.     Camden  Society.     London.     1846. 
Chronicle  (Spanish)  of  King  Henry  VIII.     Translated  by  M.  A.  S.  Hume.     London. 

1889.     [A  strange,  confused  account  by  a  Spaniard  who  was  in  England  in  the 

end  of  the  reign.] 
Fabyan,  Robert.     Chronicles.     Ed.  by  Ellis.     1811. 
Hall,  E.     Chronicle.     London.     1548.     Reprinted,  1809. 
Herbert,  Edward,  Lord,  of  Cherbury.      Life  and   Reign   of   Henry  VIII.    London. 

1649  etc.     (May  be  consulted  in  Kennett's  Complete  History  of  England.     Vol. 

n.     1706.) 
Holinshed,  R.     Chronicles.     Vols,  ii  and  iii.     London.     1587. 

789 


790  Henry  VIII 


London  Chronicle  in  the  times  of  Henry  VII  and  Henry  VIII.     Ed.  C.  Hopper.     Cam- 
den Miscellany.     Vol.  iv.     1859. 
Stow,  J.     Chronicle.     London.     1615. 
Wriothesley,  C.    Chronicle.     Vol.  i.     Ed.  W.  D.  Hamilton.     Camden  Soc.     1875. 


Special 

Cavendish,  G.     Life  of  Wolsey.     Kelmscott  ed.     1893. 

Chauncy,  M.     Historia  aliquot  Martyrum.     Ed.  V.  M.  Doreau.     London.     1888. 

Foxe,  J.     Acts  and  Monuments.     Townsend's  ed.     Vols,  iv,  v.     1846. 

Narratives  of  the  Reformation.     Ed.  J.  G.  Nichols.     Camden  Soc.     1859. 

Harpsfleld,  N.     Treatise  of  the  pretended  Divorce  between  Henry  VIII  and  Catherine 

of  Aragon.     Ed.  N.  Pocock.     Camden  Soc.     1878. 
More,   Cresacre.     Life  and   death   of  Sir  Thomas   More.     Ed.   J.    Hunter.     London. 

1828. 
Ortroy,    Van    (BoUandist).     Vie  du    bienheureux    Martyr,    Jean    Fisher.      Brussels. 

1893. 
Roper,  W.     Life  of  Sir  T.  More.     Paris.     1626.     Chiswick.     1817. 
Sanders,  N.     Historia  Schismatis  Anglican!.     Cologne.     1628. 

Ti'anslation  by  D.  Lewis.    London.     1877. 

Stapleton,  T.     Tres  Thomae.     (Sir  T.  More  being  one.)     Cologne.     1612. 


Published  Documents 

Actenstticke  und  Briefe  zur  Geschichte  Kaiser  Karls  V.     Monumenta  Habsburgica. 

(Kaiserliche  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften.)     Vienna.     1853,  1857. 
Baga  de  Secretis,  Calendar  of.    Third  Report  of  Dep.  Keeper  of  the  Public  Records. 

App.  II,  234-268. 
Bradford,  William.     Correspondence  of  Charles  V  and  his  Ambassadors  at  the  Courts 

of  England  and  France.     London.     1850. 
Calendars,  Rolls  Series :  — 

Letters  and  Papers,  Henry  VIII.     Vols,  iii  and  following.     Edd.  J.  S.  Brewer, 

James  Gairduer,  R.  H.  Brodie.     1867  etc. 
Spanish  State  Papers.     Vols,  ii  and  following.      Edd.   G.  A.   Bergenroth  and 

P.  de  Gayangos.     1866  etc. 
Venetian.     Vols,  iii-v.     Ed.  Rawdon  Brown.     1869-73. 

Carew   MSS.   (1515-74).     Edd.  J.   S.  Brewer  and  W.   Buller.     1867.     [Vowell's 
Life  of  Sir  Peter  Carew,  printed  at  the  end  of  the  Introduction,  contains  at 
pp.  Ixxx,  Ixxxi  an  account  of  the  loss  of  the  Mary  Bose.] 
Collier,  J.  P.     Trevelyan  Papers.     Pts  i  and  ii.     Camden  Soc.     1857,  1863. 
Daseut,   J.    R.     Acts    of  the  Privy  Council.      New   Series.      Vol.    i.     Rolls    Series. 

1890. 
Ehses,  S.     Romische  Dokuraente  zur  Geschichte  der  Ehescheidung   Heinrichs  VIII 

von  England,  1527-1534.     Paderborn.     1893. 
Ellis,  Sir  H.     Original  Letters.     Three  Series.     1824-46. 

Erasmi  Epistola?.     London.     1642.     Another  edition,  by  Leclei'c,  published  at  Leyden, 
1703. —  [The  Epistles  of  Erasmus,  translated  and  arranged  in  order  of  time  by 
F.  M.  Nichols  —  only  comes  down,  at  least  at  present,  to  the  accession  of  Henry 
VIII;  but  is  of  great  value  to  the  student.] 
Excerpta  Historica.     1831.     pp.  260-5,  290-2. 

Gee,  H.,  and  Hardy,  W.  H.     Documents  illustrative  of  English  Church  History.     Lon- 
don.    1896. 
Hales,  J.    A  Discourse  of  the  Commonweal  of  this  realm  of  England.     1549.     Ed.  by 

E.  Lamond.     Cambridge.     1893. 
Hamy's  Entrevue.     See  next  Section. 


Biblioyraphy  791 


Haynes,  S.     State  Papers,  1542-70.     London.     1740. 

Henry  VIII's  Love  Letters  to  Anne  Bolcyn.  Published  by  Honrnc.  App.  to  Robert  of 
Avesbury,  347-301,  and  in  tlie  llarleiaii  Miscellany,  vol.  iii,  47-(;0;  also  by  Kditor 
of  the  Uistoria  Britunum  [W.  Gunii]  in  the  Pamphleteer,  vol.  .\.\i,  34C-8  and 
vol.  XXII,  114-123,  with  some  vaUiable  additional  documents.  They  have  also 
been  published  at  Paris  by  Crapelet  in  an  8"  volume,  with  the  addition  of  a  con- 
temporary French  poem  containing  a  life  of  Anne  Boleyn  written  a  fortnight 
after  her  execution. 

Historical  MSS.  Commission :  —  Calendar  of  the  mss.  of  the  Marquis  of  Sali.>>bury. 
Ft  I.     1883. 

Jessopp,  A.     Monastic  Visitations  in  the  Diocese  of  Norwich.     Camden  Soc.     1888. 

Kaulek,  J.  Correspondance  politique  de  MM.  de  Castillon  et  de  Marillac.  Paris. 
1885. 

Laemraer,  H.     Monuraenta  Vaticana.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1801. 

Lauz,  Karl.     Correspondenz  des  Kaisers  Karl  V.     Vols,  i,  ii.     Leipzig.     1844-5. 

Leach,  A.  F.     Visitations  of  Southwell.     Camden  Soc.     1891. 

Lefevre-Pontalis,  G.  Correspondance  politique  d'Udet  de  Selve.  Commission  des 
Archives  Diplomatiques.     Paris.     1888. 

Merriman,  R.  B.  Life  and  letters  of  Thomas  Cromwell.  2  vols.  Oxford.  1902. 
[The  collection  of  letters  includes  all  those  known  to  have  been  written  by 
Cromwell.] 

Nichols,  J.  G.  Inventories  of  the  Household  Stuff  of  Henry  Fitzroy  Duke  of  Rich- 
mond, and  of  Katherine  Princess  Dowager.  Camden  Miscellany.  Vol.  in. 
1885. 

Nicolas,  Sir  N.  H.  Proceedings  and  Ordinances  of  the  Privy  Council.  Record  Com- 
mission.    Vol.  VII. 

Pocock,  N.     Records  of  the  Reformation.    2  vols.     Oxford.     1870. 

Pole,  Cardinal  R.     Epistolse.     Ed.  Quirini.     Brixen.     1744-57. 

Rutland  Papers.     Ed.  Jerdan.     Camden  Soc.     1842. 

Rymer,  T.     Fcedera.     Vols,  xiv,  xv.     1st  ed. 

Scotland.  The  late  Expedicion  in  Scotlande  .  .  .  under  the  Erie  of  Ilertforde,  1544. 
Printed  by  Reynold  Wolfe,  1544.  Reprinted  by  John  Graham  Dalzell  in  Frag- 
ments of  Scottish  History.     Edinburgh.     1798. 

State  Papers,  Henry  VIII.  11  vols.  Published  by  the  Government.  1830-52.  Vol.  i 
(in  two  Parts)  contains  Domestic  State  Papers;  vols,  ii,  iii,  Irish;  vols,  iv,  v, 
Scotch;  vols,  vi-xi,  Foreign. 

Statute  of  the  Realm.     Vol.  iii.     1817. 

Theiner,  A.  Vetera  Monuraenta  Hibernorum  et  Scotorum  historiam  illustrantia. 
Romas.     1804.  ' 

TurnbuU,  W.  B.  Account  of  Monastic  Treasures  confiscated  at  the  Dissolution.  By 
Sir  John  Williams,  master  and  treasurer  of  the  jewels  to  Henry  VIIL  Abbots- 
ford  Club.     Edinburgh.     1836. 

Wilkins,  D.     Concilia.    Vol.  iii.     1737. 

Wright,  T.     Suppression  of  the  Monasteries.     Camden  Soc.     1843. 

See  also  Collections  in  the  Church  Histories  of  Burnet,  Collier,  and  Dodd. 


Principal  Moi>kkn  Histokiks 

So  much  new  light  has  been  thrown  upon  this  period,  that  all  |»ri;vious  gcntTiii 
histories  of  England,  such  as  those  of  Hume,  Rapin,  I/mgard,  and  Fronde,  require 
very  material  correction  as  well  as  enlargement.  The  same  is  also  the  case  with  the 
most  familiar  Church  Histories,  viz.  those  of  Burnet,  Collier,  and  Dodd,  though  their 


792  Henry  VIII 


collections  of  documents  are  of  great  value.     The  following  works  may  be  named  as 
embodying  some  of  the  results  of  recent  research :  — 

Brewer,  J.  S.     The  Reign  of  Henry  VIII.     2  vols.     London.     1884. 

Clowes,  W.  L.     The  lloyal  Navy.     Vol.  i.     London.     1897. 

Dixon,  R.  W.     History  of  the  Church  of  England.     Vols,  i,  ii.     London.     1878,  1881. 

Doreau,  V.  M.     Henri  VIII   et   les   Martyrs   de  la  Chartreuse  de  Londres.     Paris. 

1890. 
Du  Boys,   A.     Catherine  d'Aragon   et  les  Origines   du  Schisme  Anglican.     Geneva. 

1880.     Translation  by  C.  M.  Yonge.    2  vols.    London.     1881. 
Friedmann,  P.     Anne  Boleyn.     2  vols.     1884. 

Gairdner,  James.     The  English  Church  in  the  Sixteenth  Century.     1902. 
Gasquet,  F.  A.     Henry  VIII  and  the  English  Monasteries.     2  vols.     London.     1888. 

Revised  popular  edition  in  one  volume.     London.     1899. 
Green,  M.  A.  E.     Lives   of  the  Princesses   of  England.     Vols,   iv  and  v.     Loudon. 

1849-55. 
Hamy,  A.     Enti'evue  de  Francois  Premier  avec  Henry  VIII  a  Boulogne  sur  Mer  en 

1532.     Paris.     1898.     With  valuable  collection  of  documents. 
Hendriks,  L.     The  London  Charter-house.    London.     1889. 

Merriman,  R.  B.     Life  and  Letters  of  Thomas  Cromwell.     2  vols.     Oxford.     1902. 
Pollard,  A.  F.     Henry  VIII.     Loudon.     1902.     [With  valuable  engravings  from  con- 
temporary pictures.] 
Ranke,  L.  von.     Englische  Geschichte,  vornehmlich  im  sechzehnten  und  siebzehnten 

Jahrhundert.     Vol.  i.     Vol.  xiv  of  Sammtliche  Werke.     Berlin.     1874  etc. 

A  History  of  England  (translation  of  the  preceding).     Vol.  i.     Oxford.     1875. 

Strickland,  A.     Lives  of  the  Queens  of  England.     Vol.  ii.    London.     1854. 

Stubbs,  W.  (Bishop).     Seventeen  Lectures  on  the  Study  of  Medieval  and  Modern 

History.    Lectures  XI,  XII.     Oxford.     1887.     1900. 


Auxiliary  Information 

Anderson,  C.     The  Annals  of  the  English  Bible.     2  vols.     London.     1845. 
Armstrong,  E.     Charles  V.     London.     1902. 

Ashley,  W.  J.     Introduction  to  English  Economic  History.     London.     1892. 
Bapst,  E.     Deux  Gentilshommes-Poetes  de  la  Cour  de  Henri  VIII.     Paris.     1891. 
Bridgett,  T.  E.     Lives  of  Fisher  (1888)  and  More  (1891). 

Busch,  W.  Cardinal  Wolsey  und  die  englisch-kaiserliche  Allianz,  1522-5.  Bonn. 
1886. 

Der  Ursprung  der  Ehescheiduug  Konig  Heinrichs  VIII.  von  England.     Histo- 

risches  Taschenbuch,  Sechste  Folge,  viii,  271-327. 

Der  Sturz  des  Cardinals  Wolsey.     Historisches  Taschenbuch,  Sechste  Folge,  ix, 

;59-114. 

Creighton,  M.  (Bishop).  Cardinal  Wolsey.  Twelve  English  Statesmen  Series.  Lon- 
don.    1888. 

Cunningham,  W.     Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce.     Cambridge.     1896. 

Du  Bellay,  Martin.    Memoires.     Michaud  et  Poujoulat,  v. 

Early  English  Text  Society's  Publications :  — England  in  the  Reign  of  Henry  VIII. 
1871,  1878. 

Four  Supplications.     1871. 

English  Historical  Review,     xi,  673-702.     xii,  1-16.  237-253.     London.     1896-7. 
Furnivall,  F.  J.     Ballads  from  MSS.     Ballad  Society.     1868-72. 
Gasquet,  F.   A.     The  Eve  of  the  Reformation.     London.     1900. 

Gratianus,  Orthuinus.  Fasciculus  Rerum  expetendarum  et  fugiendarum.  Cum 
Appendice  opera  Edwardi  Brown.     London.     1690. 


BihliograpJuj  1S)\\ 


Jacqueton,  G.     La  Politique  ext^rienre  de  Louise  dc  Savoic.     I'aris.     1892. 
Jusserand,  J.  A.  A.  F.     English  Wayfaring  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages.    Translated  by 

L.  Toulmin  Smith.     London.     1892. 
Leadani,   I.   S.     The  Domesday  of  Inclosures,    1517-8.      Royal    Hist.    Soc.     London. 

1897.     Comp.  Royal  Hist.  Society's  Transactions,  N.S.  vi.  1G7;  vii.  I'll  \  viii.  I'JI 

and  XIV,  231-303. 
Mignet,  F.  A,  M.     Rivalit^  de  Fran9ois  I  et  de  Charles  Quint.     Taris.     1875. 
MuUinger,  J.  B.     The  University  of  Cambridge.     Vols,  i  and  ii.     Cambridge.     187:'., 

1884. 
Oppenheim,  M.     A  History  of  the  Administration  of  the  Royal  Navy  and  of  Merchant 

Shipping  in  relation  to  the  Navy.     1506-lGGO.     London.     1897. 
Pauli,  R.     Aufsiitze  zur  Englischen  Gescliichte.     Leipzig.     18G9. 

Neue  Folge.     Leipzig.     1883. 

Drei  vollcswirthschaftliche  Denkschriften  aus  der  Zeit  Heinrichs  VIII      Gfit- 

tingen,     1878.     In   vol.    xxiii   of   Abhandlung  der  Kiiniglichen  Ge.sellschaft  der 

Wisseuschaften  zu  Gottingen. 
Rogers,  J.  E.  T.    Tlie  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices.     Vol.  iv.     o.xford.     1882 
Royal  Historical  Society's  Publications  {see  also  Leadam,  L  S.)  :  — 

Transactions,  Old  Series,     iv,  260.     Memoir  of  Geo.   Wishart.     By  Ch.  Rogers, 
vm,  242.     Henry  VIII's  '  Assertio  Septem  Sacramentorum.'     By  J.  M.  Brown. 

New  Series,     vi,    167.      The   Inquisition  of    1517;    also   viii,  127  and   viii, 

251.  By  I.  S.  Leadam.  vii,  21.  Notes  on  the  Family  of  Botoun.  By 
H.  E.  Maiden.  ix,  167.  The  Tudors  and  the  Currency.  By  C.  W.  C. 
Oman,  xiii,  75.  The  Fall  of  Cardinal  Woisey.  By  J.  Gairdner.  xiv,  231. 
The  Inquisitions  of  Depopulation  in  1517.  By  E.  F.  Gay  (in  answer  to 
Leadam). 
Russell,  F.  W.  Kett's  Rebellion  in  Norfolk.  London.  1859. 
Schanz,    G.      Die    Handelsbeziehungen    zwischen    England    uud    den    Niederlaudcn. 

1485-1547.     Wurzburg.     1879. 
Seebohm,  F.     The  Oxford  Reformers  of  1498.     John  Colet,  Erasmus,  Thomas  More. 

3rd  ed.     London.     189G. 
Shaw,  W.  A.     History  of  Currency.     London.     1895. 
Skelton,  J.     Poetical  Works.     Ed.  A.  Dyce.     2  vols.     London.     1843. 
Strype,  John.     'Memorials   of    Cranmer'  and    'Ecclesiastical    Memorials,'    valuat>le 

chiefly  for  their  documents. 
Trollope,   E.     On  Anne   Askew,   in    Associated  Architectural  Societies'   Report,  vi, 

117-134. 
Westcott,  B.  F.  (Bishop).     History  of  the  English  Bible.     London.     1868. 
Wood,  Ant.  k.     Hist,  and  Antiquities  of  the  University  of  Oxford.     Vol.  ii.     Oxford. 

1796. 


SCOTLAND 
See  Bibliography   in   Brown,    P    H.     History   of   Scotland.     Vol.    i.     Caml)ridge. 


PUBLISIIKI)    DOCIMKNTS 

Bannatyne  Miscellany.     Vol.  i.     Edin.  ^ 

Exchequer  Rolls  of   Scotland.     Vols,   xv-xviii.     VA.    by    G.    P.    McNcdl.     Register 

House  Series. 
Hamilton  Papers.     2  vols.     Ed.  by  J.  Bain.     Register  House  Series. 
Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland.     Vol.  i.     Ed.  by  J.  II.  Burton.     RegJsHT 

House  Series. 
Ruddimann,  T.     Epislola;  Jacobi  Quarti,  Jacobi  Quinti  et  Mariie,  Regum  Scotorum. 

Edin.     1722-4. 


794  Henry  VIII 


State  Papers.     See  above.     [Vols,  iv  and  v  relate  to  Scotland.] 

Teulet,   A.     Papiers  d'Etat  .  .  .  relatifs  h  rhistoire  de  rEcosse.      Bannatyne  Club. 

Vol.  I.     Paris.     [1851.] 
- — -    Relations  politiques  de  la  France  et  de  I'Espagne  avec  I'ilcosse  au  16""^  siecle. 

Paris  and  Bordeaux.      1862.      [Virtually   identical    in    its    contents    with    the 

preceding.  ] 
Theiner,  A.     See  above,  England,  Published  Documents. 
The  late  Expedicion  in  Scotlande.     See  above,  ibid. 


Histories 

Bapst,  E.     Les  Mariages  de  Jaques  V.     Paris.     1889. 

Brown,  P.  Hume.     History  of  Scotland.     Vols,  i,  ii.     Cambridge.     1899,  1902, 

Buchanan,  G.     Rerum  Scoticarum  Historia.     Edinburgh.     1582  etc. 

Translation  by  Aikman.     4  vols.     Glasgow.     1827. 

Diurnal  of  Occurrents.     Bannatyne  Club.     Edinburgh.     1833. 
Green,  M.  A.  E.     Lives  of  the  Princesses  of  England.     Vol.  iv. 
Holinshed,  R.     Chronicles.     Vol.  i.     London.     1587. 
Herkless,  J.     Cardinal  Beaton.    Edin.     1891. 

Knox,  John.     Works.     Vol.  i.     History  of  the  Reformation.     Ed.  by  D.  Laing.     Ban- 
natyne Club.     Edinburgh.     1846. 
Lesley,  J.     History  of  Scotland.     Edin.     1830. 
Pinkerton,  J.     History  of  Scotland.     Loudon.     1797. 

Strickland,  A.     Lives  of  the  Queens  of  Scotland.     Vols,  i,  n.     Edin.     1850-1. 
Tytler,  P.  F.     History  of  Scotland.     Eadie's  edition.    Vol.  ii.     Glasgow.     [1873-7.] 
Wright,  Thomas.     History  of  Scotland.     3  vols.     London  and  New  York.     1856. 


IRELAND 
Published  Documents 

Calendar  of  the  State  Papers  relating  to  Ireland.     Ed.  H.  C.  Hamilton.     Vol.  i.     1860. 
Calendar  of  the  Carew  MSS.  at  Lambeth.    Ed.  J.  S.  Brewer  and  W.  Bullen.     Vol.  i. 

1867. 
State  Papers,  Henry  VIII.     See  above.     [Vols,  n  and  ni  relate  to  Ireland.] 


Histories 

Annals  of  the  Four  Masters.     Ed.  J.  O'Donovan.     Vol.  iii.     Dublin.     1848. 

Bagwell,  R.     Ireland  under  the  Tudors.     Vol.  i.     1885. 

Holinshed,  R.     Chronicles.    Vol.  i.     London.     1587. 

Richey,  A.  G.     A  short  History  of  the  Irish  People.     Dublin.     1S87. 

Wright,  Thomas.     History  of  Ireland.    2  vols.     London.     1854. 


CHAPTER   XIY 

THE   REFORMATION    UNDER   EDWARD  VI 

MANUSCRIPTS 

A.     State    Papkrs 

The  Domestic  State  Papers  of  the  reign  of  Edward  VI  in  the  Record  Offlce  are 
comparatively  scanty,  there  being  only  nineteen  volumes  in  the  regular  scries,  and 
seven  volumes  of  Addenda  (consisting  chiefly  of  documents  relating  to  Scotland  and 
the  Borders).  The  Foreign  State  Papers  include  an  imperfect  series  of  despatches 
from  English  representatives  abroad,  transcripts  of  despatches  from  foreign  ambas- 
sadors resident  in  England,  and  a  series  entitled  the  Calais  Papers.  Many  were 
transcribed  with  a  view  to  a  new  edition  of  Rymer's  Foedera,  and  a  list  of  them  is 
printed  in  vol.  iii,  pp.  xxxiv-liii,  of  Hardy's  Syllabus,  1885.  Tiiere  are  also  five 
volumes  of  State  Papers  relating  to  Scotland.  For  other  diplomatic  correspondence, 
see  type-written  Lists  of  Transcripts  in  the  Record  Office ;  and  Reports  33,  36,  39,  42-7 
of  the  Deputy  Keeper  of  Records. 

The  State  Papers  at  the  British  Museum  are  numerous,  but,  not  as  a  rule  being 
arranged  according  to  subject,  they  are  diflicult  to  consult;  there  are,  however,  Ber- 
genroth's  Transcripts  of  Simancas  Papers  (Add.  M8S.  28505-7)  and  a  series  of  Scottish 
State  Papers  known  as  the  Hamilton  Papers  (Add.  MSS.  32091,  32G47-8,  32C54,  and 
32657).  Other  single  volumes  of  great  value  are  scattered  throughout  the  Cotton. 
Harley,  Lansdowne,  Royal,  Stowe,  and  Additional  Collections,  and  the  only  guide  to 
them  is  to  be  found  in  the  various  ms.  Class  Catalogues  kept  in  the  mss.  Department  at 
the  Museum.  Some  of  the  more  important  volumes  arc  Edward  VTs  Journal  (Cotton 
MS.  Nero  C.  x),  the  Privy  Council's  Warrant  Book  (Royal  MS.  18  C.  xxiv),  Starkey's 
collection  of  letters  and  papers  (Harley  MS.  353),  and  the  documents  relating  to 
Somerset's  agrarian  policy  (Lansdowne  MS.  238). 

The  Privy  Council's  Register  is  at  the  Privy  Council  Office  in  Whitehall;  the  Inner 
Temple  Library  possesses  a  valuable  collection  of  State  Papers  entitled  the  Petyt 
MSS. ;  the  Tall)ot  Papers  in  the  College  of  Arms  contain  some  six  thousand  public  and 
private  letters  dating  from  the  sixteenth  century;  tlic  Manjuis  of  Salisbury's  collec- 
tion at  Hatfield  includes  some  three  hundred  documents  relating  to  the  reign,  and 
isolated  State  Papers  are  to  be  found  in  many  other  private  libraries. 


B.     MisCKLi..\.XEOUs  MSS. 

Besides  State  Papers,  the  Record  Office  contains  a  vast  mass  of  materials  to  which 
the  historian  must  have  occasional  recourse.  Such  are  the  Patent  and  Close  Rolls,  the 
records  of  the  Star  Chamber,  the  Admiralty  Courts  and  Court  of  Requests,  the  Courts 

795 


796  The  Reformation  under  Edward  VI 

of  Augmentations,  First  Fruits  and  Tenths,  and  the  Baga  de  Secretis,  which  contains 
records  of  the  state  trials  (cf.  J.  Scargill-Bird's  Guide  to  the  Record  Office,  2nd  ed. 
1896).  Acts  of  Parliament  not  printed  in  the  Statutes  at  Large  may  be  found  in  the 
Eolls  of  Parliament  at  the  Record  Office,  but  Acts  not  entered  on  the  Roll  and  not 
printed  in  the  Statutes  at  Large  must  be  sought  at  the  Parliament  Office.  The  Society 
of  Antiquaries  possesses  an  interesting  collection  of  ms.  Proclamations. 


C.     EccLEsiASTiCAi.  Documents 

The  most  important  unpublished  sources  are  the  episcopal  registers,  particularly 
those  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  the  Bishop  of  London.  The  Records  of 
Convocation  ■were  destroyed  at  the  Fire  of  London,  but  a  collection  of  Svnodalia,  1547- 
15S0,  exists  in  Brit.  Mus.  Egerton  MS.  2350.  In  the  British  :Museum  the  Lansdowne 
Collection  is  particularly  rich  in  ecclesiastical  mss.  :  volumes  335.  388.  389,819.  and 
1045  contain  some  of  Foxe  the  martyrologisfs  papers,  and  others  are  extant  in  Harley 
MSS.  416-426  and  590.  The  Royal  Collection  has  other  ecclesiastical  documents  of 
interest,  particularly  the  report  (Royal  MS.  17  B  sxxix)  of  the  debate  in  the  Lords  on 
the  first  Act  of  Uniformity,  the  earliest  report  of  a  parliamentary  debate  extant  (cf .  also 
MS.  Class  Catalogue.  'Church  History.'  in  Brit.  Museum  Department  of  MSS.). 
Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge,  has  a  valuable  collection  of  Cranmer's  papers 
bequeathed  by  Archbishop  Parker  (cf.  Xasmith's  Catalogus,  1777).  There  are  also 
some  MSS.  of  importance  at  Lambeth  (see  H.  J.  Todd"s  Catalogue.  1812). 


COXTEMPOEAEY   PEIXTED   AUTHORITIES 
1.     Calexdaks 

The  Calendar  of  Domestic  State  Papers  (ed.  Lemon.  1856)  is  inadequate,  but  the 
Addenda  for  Edward  VI's  reign  (ed.  M.  A.  E.  Green,  and  appended  1870  to  the 
Domestic  Calendar  for  1601-3)  is  more  satisfactory.  The  Foreign  Calendar  (ed. 
TurnbuU,  1861)  is  also  adequate.  The  Scottish  Calendar  (ed.  Thorpe.  1858)  is  super- 
seded, so  far  as  Edward  VPs  reign  is  concerned,  by  the  Calendar  of  Scottish  State 
Papers  (ed.  Bain.  Edinburgh,  1898).  and  the  Venetian  Calendar  (ed.  Rawdon  Brown, 
1873)  contains  little  of  importance  except  Barbaro's  Relation  (pp.  338-362).  The 
Hamilton  Papers  have  been  printed  in  full  by  the  Lord  Clerk  Register  of  Scotland 
(2  vols.,  ed.  Bain,  Edinburgh,  1890). 

2.     Other  Collections  of  State  Papers 

Correspondance  Politique  d'Odet  de  Selve.     1546-9.     French  Foreign   Office.     Paris. 

1888. 
Ribier,  G.     Lettres  et  Memoires  d'Estat.     Paris.     2  vols.     1666. 
Teulet,  A.     Relations  Politiques  de  la  France  et  de  TEspagne  avec  T^cosse.     5  vols. 

Paris.     1862. 
Papiers  d'Etat  relatifs  k  I'histoire  de  I'Ecosse  au  xvi«'  siecle.     Bannatyne  Club. 

3  vols.     Edinburgh.     1851-60. 
Vertot,  I'Abbe.     Ambassades  des  Noailles  en  Angleterre.     5  vols.     Leyden.     1763. 
Weiss,  C.     Papiers  d'Etat  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle.     Coll.  de  doc.  Inedits.     9  vols. 

Paris.     1841-52. 

A  few  documents  relating  to  the  period  are  also  printed  in  the  Hardwicke  Papers, 
edited  by  the  2nd  Earl  of  Hardwicke,  2  vols.,  London,  1778;  and  the  Sadlier  State 
Papers,  edited  by  A.  Clifford.  2  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1809. 


Bibliography  797 


3.    Collections  of  Pkivatk  Lkttkks  anu  1'ai>kk.s 

Ellis,  Sir  H.  Original  Letters.  (From  the  British  Museum.)  11  vols.  Loudon 
1824-1846. 

Haynes,  S.     Burghley  State  Papers.     London.     1740. 

Kempe,  A.  J.  Loseley  MSS.  (Selections  from  Papers  at  Losek-y  Park,  Guildford.) 
Loudon.     1835. 

Lodge.  E.  Illustrations  of  British  History,  etc.  (Letters  in  the  College  of  Arms.) 
2nd  ed.     3  vols.     London.     1838. 

Pocock,  X.  Troubles  connected  with  the  First  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  (Papers 
selected  from  the  Petyt  MSS.)     Camden  Soc.     London.     1884. 

Reports  and  Appendices  to  Reports  of  the  Historical  MSS.  Commission.  (These  are 
too  numerous  to  be  mentioned  in  detail;  tlie  most  important  is  the  Calendar  of 
Lord  Salisbury's  MSS.  The  Papers  at  Longleat  are  inadequately  represented 
in  the  Report,  but  some  of  the  more  interesting  are  printed  in  the  Wilts 
Archivological  Magazine,  vols,  xv,  xvi;  compare  also  1st  Rep.  App.,  p.  42, 
2nd  Rep.  App.,  pp.  41,  45,  151,  152.) 


4.    ParliaiMentary  and  Official 

Acts  of  the  Privy  Council.     Ed.  J.  R.  Dasent.    Vols,  ii-iv.     London.     1890-2. 
Dumont,  J.     Corps  Uuiversel  Diplomatique.     8  vols.     The  Hague.     1725. 
Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons.     Vol.  i.     London,  n.  d. 
Journals  of  the  House  of  Lords.     Vol.  i.     London,  n.  d. 

Official  Return  of  Members  of  Parliament.     4  pts.     London.     1878-1891.     [These  are 
the   only  lists  of  members  extant,  but  they  are   very  incomplete  in  the   16th 
century.] 
Proclamations.     London.     1550.     (A  collected  volume  of  Proclamations.     1547-1550.) 
Rymer,  T.     Foedera.     Original  ed.     1704-1717.     17  vols. 
Statutes  of  the  Realm.     Record  Commission.     Vol.  iv,  Pt  1.     1819. 

See  also  the  Reports  of  the  Deputy-Keeper  of  Records;  esp.  Appendix  to  Rep.  iv, 
summarising  the  contents  of  the  Baga  de  Secretis,  and  Lists  and  Indexes  issued  by 
the  Record  Office. 


5.     Contemporary  Chronicles,  Tracts,  etc. 

Chronicle  of  Queen  Jane  and  Queen  Mary.     London.     Camden  Soc.     1850. 

Cooper,  T.    Epitome  of  Chronicles.     London.     1560. 

Grafton,  R.     Chronicle.     London.     1568.     New  ed.     2  vols.     London.     1809. 

Greyf  riars'  Chronicle.     Camden  Soc.     London.     1852. 

Hoby,  Sir  T.     Travels  and  Life.  1547-64.     Camden  Soc.  Miscellany,  vol.  x,  1902. 

Literary  Remains  of  Edward  VL  Roxburghe  Club.  VA.  J.  G.  Niciiols.  2  vols. 
London.  1857.  [Contains  all  the  extant  writings  of  the  young  King  and 
prints  many  other  illustrative  documents.  Edward  VI's  statements  must  always 
be  received  with  caution,  but  these  two  volumes  are  the  most  valuable  of 
all  printed  collections  for  the  history  of  the  reign.] 

Machyn,  H.     Diary.     Camden  Soc.     London.     1847. 

Narratives  of  the  Reformation.     Camden  Soc.     London.     1860. 

Ponet,  Bishop.     Treatise  of  Politicke  Power.     1556.     Other  editions,  1639  and  1642. 

Smith,  Sir  T.  De  Republica  Anglorum.  London.  1583.  The  only  adequate 
contemporary  account  of  the  P^nglish  constitution. 

Spanish  Chronicle  of  Henry  VIIL  Ed.  M.  A.  S.  Hume.  Loudon.  1889.  [Un- 
trustworthy. ] 

Wriothesley,  C.     Chronicle.     Camden  Soc.     2  vols.     Ix>ndon.     1875. 


798  The  Reformation  under  Edward  VI 


6.    Ecclesiastical 

Bucer,  M.     Scripta  Anglicana.    Basel.     1577. 

Cardwell,  E.     Documentary  Annals  of  the  Reformed  Church  of  England.     2  vols. 

Oxford.     1844. 
Foxe,    J.     Acts    and    Monuments.     8    vols.     Ed.    G.    Townsend.     London.     1843-9. 

[Contains  a  vast  number  of  facts  and  documents,  and  its  errors  are  certainly 

not  greater  than  in  similar  works.] 
Knox,  John.     Worlds.     Bannatyne  Club.     6  vols.     Edinburgh.     1846-64.     [Especially 

the  Admonition  to  the  Pi'ofessors  of  the  Truth  in  England.] 
Pole,  R.     Epistolae.    5  vols.     Brescia.     1744-57. 
Sleidan.     [Philippson,   Jean.]     Commentarii,    Strassburg,    1555,  and  History  of  the 

Reformation  from  1517  to  1556.     Ed.  1689. 
Sparrow,  A.     Collection  of  Articles,  Injunctions,  and  Canons.     London.     1661. 
Wilkins,  David.     Concilia.     London.     1737.     4  vols. 
Zurich  Letters  and  Original  Letters.     Parker  Soc.     4  vols.     1845-7. 

See  also  the  works  of  Craumer,  Coverdale,  Hooper,  Latimer,  Bale,  Bradford, 
BuUinger,  Becon,  Hutchinson,  Ridley  (all  published  by  the  Parker  Society). 
A  similar  Corpus  of  the  works  of  Roman  Catholic  divines  is  needed.  Tlie  most 
important  contemporary  statements  of  the  Roman  Catholic  case  are  Gai'diner's 
Explanation  and  Assertion  of  the  True  Catholic  Faith,  1551,  and  Confutatio  Cavilla- 
tionum,  Paris,  1552;  Tunstall's  De  Veritate,  Paris,  1554;  and  (Bishop)  Thomas 
Watson's  Wholesome  and  Catholic  Doctrine  (London,  1558,  re-ed.  by  T.  E.  Bridgett, 
London,  1876). 

7.     Social  and  Economic 

Ballads  from  MSS.     Ballad  Society.     Ed.  F.  J.  Furnivall,    London.     1868. 

Brynkelow,  H.     Complaynt  of  Roderick  Mors.     Early  English  Text  Society.     1874. 

Crowley,  R.     Works.     Early  English  Text  Society.     1872. 

Discourse  of  the  Commonweal.     Ed.  E.  Lamond.     Cambridge.     1893. 

Four  Supplications  of  the  Commons.     Early  English  Text  Society.     1871. 

Lever,  Thomas.     Sermons.     Ed.  E.  Arber.     London.     1871. 

Starkey,  Thomas.     England  under  Henry  VIII.     Early  English  Text  Soc.     1871. 

Tusser,  T.     Hundred  Points  of  Husbandry.     London.     1557. 

Wilson,  T.     Discourse  upon  Usuiy.     London.     1572. 


8.    Relations  with  Scotland 

Berteville,  Sir  J.     Recit  de  I'Exp^dition  en  :fecosse  (1547).     Bannatyne  Club.     1825. 
Patten,    W.      Expedition    into    Scotland.      In    Tudor    Tracts.      Ed.    A.    F.    Pollard. 

Arber's  English  Garner.     1903. 
The    Complaynt    of    Scotland,    Epitome   of    the    King  of    England's    Title  to  the 

Sovereignty  of   Scotland,  Henryson's  Godly  and  Golden  Book,  and  Somerset's 

Epistle  to  the  Nobility  of  Scotland,  are  all  edited  for  the  Early  English  Text 

Soc.     1872. 

SECONDARY  AUTHORITIES 
A.     General 

Carte,  T.      History  of    England.     4    vols.      London.      1747-55.      Oxford.      6    vols. 

1851. 
Froude,  J.  A.     History  of  England.     12  vols.     London.     1856-1870.     [The  only  History 

which  has  made  adequate  use  of  the  foreign  correspondence  of  the  reign.] 


Bihliography  799 


Hayward,  Sir  J.     Life  and  Reign  of  Edward  VI.    London.     1630. 
Holinshed,  Rapliael.     Clironicles.     3  vols.     London.     1577. 
Lingard,  J.     IIi.story  of  England.     8  vols.     London.     1819-1830. 
Pollard,  A.  F.     England  under  I'rotector  Somcr.NCt.     lUOO.     (With  bibliography.) 
Rapin  de  Thoyras,  Paul.     Ilistoire  d'Anglcterre.     13  vols.     The  Hague.     1724-36, 
Speed,  J.     History  of  Great  Britain.     London.     16U. 
Stow,  J.     Annals.     London.     1G3L 

Turner,  S.     Modern  History  of  England.     2  vols.     London.     1826,  1829. 
Tytler,  P.  F.    England  in  the  Reigns  of  Edward  VI  and  Mary.    2  vols.    London. 
[Important  for  the  documents  printed  in  it.] 


B.    Ecclesiastical 

Blunt,  J.  H.     The  Reformation  of  the  Church  in  England.     London.     Vol.  ii.     1896. 

Burnet,  G.  History  of  tlie  Reformation.  3  vols.  London.  1679,  1715.  Ed.  Pocock. 
7  vols.  Oxford.  1865.  [The  latter  is  an  excellent  edition,  containing  much  new 
matter  and  Wharton's  Specimen  of  Errors;  originally  published  in  1693  under  the 
pseudonym  '  Anthony  Harmer.'] 

Collier,  Jeremy.     Ecclesiastical  History.     Ed.  Lathbury.     9  vols.     London.     18r)2. 

Dixon,  R.  W.  History  of  the  Church  of  England.  Vols,  ii  and  in.  2nd  ed.  London. 
1893. 

Dodd,  C.     Church  History.     Ed.  Tierney.     5  vols.    London.     1839-1843. 

Fuller,  T.  Church  History.  London.  ^  1655.  Ed.  J.  S.  Brewer.  6  vols.  Oxford. 
1845. 

Gairdner,  J.  The  English  Church  from  1509  to  1558.  London.  1902.  (With  biblio- 
graphical notes.) 

Heylyn,  P.  Ecclesia  Restaurata.  London.  IGGl.  Ed.  Robertson.  2  vols.  London. 
1849. 

Maitland,  S.  R.     Essays  on  the  Reformation.     London.     1899. 

Sanders,  N.  De  Origine  ac  Progressu  Schismatis.  Cologne.  1585.  Transl.  Lewis. 
London.     1877. 

Soames,  H.     History  of  the  Reformation.     4  vols.     London.     1826-8. 

Spelman,  Sir  H.     History  of  Sacrilege.     London.     1698. 

Strype,  .J.  Ecclesiastical  Memorials  and  Life  of  Cranmer.  London.  (lu  Oxford  edit. 
26  vols.     1820  sqq.)     [An  indispensable  authority.] 


SPECIAL  SUBJECTS 
A.    Constitutional  Histoky 

Atterbury,  F.  (Bishop).     Rights  and  Privileges  of  an  English  Convocation.     2nd  ed. 

London.     1701. 
Bailey,  A.     Succession  to  the  English  Crown.     London.     1879. 
Child,  G.  W.     Church  and  State  under  the  Tudors.     London.     1890. 
Cobbett,  W.     State  Trials.     Vol.  i.     London.     1809. 

Parliamentary  History.     London.     1806. 

Dicey,  A.  V.     The  Privy  Council.     Oxford.     1860. 

Gil>son,  E.     Synodus  Anglicana.     Ed.  E.  Canhvell.     (Hford.     1854. 

Harbin,  (ieorge.     The   Hereditary  Right   of   the   Crown   of   England.     [Erroneously 

ascribed  to  Ililkiah  Bedford.]     London.     1713. 
Lathbury,  T.    History  of  the  Convocation  of  the  Church  of  England.    2nd  ed.    London. 

1853. 


800  The  Reformation  under  Edward  VI 

Leadam,  I.  S.     The  Star  Chamber.     Selden  Soc.     1904. 

The  Court  of  Bequests.     Selden  Soc.     1898. 

Makower,   F.     Constitutional  History  of  the  Church  of  England.     (Engl,    transl.) 

London.     1895. 
Meyer,  A.  O.    Die  englische  Diplomatie  in  Deutschland  zur  Zeit  Eduards  VI.    Breslau. 

1900. 
Oppenheim,  M.     History  of  the  Administration  of  the  Navy.     London.     1896. 
Porritt,  E.     The  Unreformed  House  of  Commons.     2  vols.     Cambridge.     1903. 
Keport  of  the  Koyal  Commission  on  Ecclesiastical  Courts.     London.     2  vols.     1883. 
Scofield,  C.  L.     The  Star  Chamber.     Chicago.    1900.     (Cf.  '  Calendar  of  Star  Chamber 

Proceedings '  in  Dep. -Keeper  of  Records'  49th  Rep. ;  and  '  List  of  Star  Chamber 

Proceedings,'  1485-1558,  in  R.  O.  'Lists  and  Indexes,'  vol.  xni,  1902. 
Stanford,  Sir  W.     Exposition  of  the  King's  Prerogative.     London.     1567. 


B.     Social  and  Economic 

Ashley,  W.  J.     English  Economic  History.     (With  bibliography.)    Vol.  i,  pt.  2.     1893. 
Cheyuey,  E.  P.     Social  Changes  in  England  in  the  16th  Century.     Philadelphia,  Pa. 

1895.     (With  bibliography.) 
Cobbett,    W.     Protestant  Reformation.      London.      2    pts.     1824,  1827.      Ed.    F.   A. 

Gasquet.     1896. 
Cunningham,  W.     Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce.     3rd  ed.     Cambridge. 

1896-1903. 
Dowell,  S.     History  of  Taxation.     2nd  ed.     4»vols.     Loudon.     1888. 
Leadam,  I.  S.     Domesday  of  Enclosures.     Royal  Hist.  Soc.     2  vols.     London.     1897. 
Prothero,  R.  E.     Pioneers  and  Progress  of  English  Farming.     London.     1888. 
Rogers,  T.     History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices   in  England.    Vols,  iii,  iv.     Oxford. 

1882. 
Russell,  F.  W.     Kett's  Rebellion.     London.     1859.     [Prints  many  documents.] 
Smith,  J.     Memoirs  of  Wool,    2  vols.     1747. 


C.     The  English  Bible,  Church  Services  and  Ornaments 

Anderson,  C.    Annals  of  the  Bible.     2  vols.     London.     1845. 

Certificates  of  Chantry  Commissioners.     Surtees  Soc.    Vol.  xcl     Durham.     1894. 

Cotton,  H.    Editions  of  the  Bible  in  England,  1505-1850.     Oxford.     1852. 

Dore,  J.  R.     Old  English  Bibles.     2nd  ed.     London.     1888. 

Gasquet,  F.  A.,  and  Bishop,  E.     Edward  VI  and  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.     London. 

1890.     [A  most  valuable  book.] 
Grove,  Sir  G.     Dictionary  of  Music.     4  vols.    London.     1878-1889. 
Inventories  of  Church  Goods.     Surtees  Society.     Vol.  xcvii.     Durham.     1897. 
Julian,  J.     Dictionary  of  Hymnology.     London.     1892. 

Lancashire  Chantries.     Ed.  F.  R.  Raines.     Chetham  Society.     Manchester.     1862. 
Liturgies  of  Edward  VI.     Parker  Society.     Ed.  J.  Ketley.     Cambridge.     1844. 
Mely,  F.  de,  and  Bishop,  E.     Bibliographic  G^nerale  des  Inventaii'es  imprimis.     3  vols. 

Paris.     1892-5. 
Micklethwaite,  J.  T.     The  Ornaments  of  the  Rubric.     Alcuin  Club  Tracts.     London. 

1897. 
Nightingale,  J.  E.     Church  Plate  of  Dorset,  1889,  and  of  Wilts,  1891.     Salisbury. 
North,  T.     Church  Bells  of  Leicestershire,  1876 ;  of  Northamptonshire,  1878 ;  Rutland, 

1880;   Lincolnshire,  1882. —Leicester.     Bedfordshire,  1883 ;    Hertfordshire,  1887. 

—  London. 
Parker,  J.     The  First  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI.     Oxford.     1877. 
Peacock,  E.     English  Church  Furniture  in  Lincolnshire.     1866. 


Bihliogrcqihij  801 


Procter,  F.,  and  Frere,  W.  II.     New  History  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.     London. 

Pullan,  L.     History  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.     London.     1900. 

Somerset  Chantries.     Ed.  E.  Green.     Somerset  Record  Soc.     London.     1888. 

Todd,  H.  J.     Observations  on  the  Metrical  Versions  of  the  Psalms  by  Stcrnhold, 

Hopkins,  and  others.     London.     1822. 
Trollope,  A.     Church  Plate  of  Leicestershire.     Leicester.     1890. 


D.      BlOGU.lPIIY 

Cranmer,  Archbishop.     Lives  of,  by  H.  J.  Todd  (2  vols.  1831),  C.  W.  Le  Bas  (2  vols. 

1833),  Dean  Hook  in  Lives  of  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  (12  vols.  18G0-7G), 

and  A.  F.  Pollard  (1904). 
Dictionary  of  National  Biography.     66  vols.     London.     1885-1901. 
Hennessy,  G.     Novum  Repertorium  Eccl.  Londin.     London.     1898. 
Le  Neve,   J.     Fasti  Eccl.    Anglicanae.      Ed.    Sir  T.    D.    Hardy.      3   vols.      Oxford. 

1854. 
Nares,  E.    Memoirs  of  Lord  Burleigh.     Vol.  i.     London.     1828. 
Newcourt,   R.      Repertorium   Eccl.    Londin.   Parochiale.      2   vols.      London.      1708, 

1710. 
Stubbs,  W.  (Bishop).     Reg.  Sacrum  Anglicanum.     2nd  ed.    Oxford.     1897. 
Wordsworth,  C.    Ecclesiastical  Biography.    4th  ed.     4  vols.     London.     1853. 


E.     Debasement  of  the  Coinage 

Hawkins,  E.     Silver  Coins  of  England.     London.     1887. 

Oman,  C.  W.  C.     In  Trans.  Royal  Hist.  Soc.     New  Ser.     Vol.  ix.     London.     1895. 
Ruding,   R.     Annals  of  the   Coinage.      3rd  ed.     Ed.  Akerman.      3  vols.     London. 
1840. 

F.     Education  and  the  Univeksities 

Carlisle,  N.     Endowed  Grammar  Schools.    2  vols.    London.     1818. 
Cooper,  C.  H.     Athenae  Cantab.     2  vols.     Cambridge.     1858-61. 

Annals  of  Cambridge.     4  vols.     Cambridge.     1842-52. 

Leach,  A.  F.     Englisli  Schools  at  the  Reformation.     Westminster.     1896. 

Mullinger,  J.   P..     History   of   the   University   of   Cambridge.     Vol.    ii.     Cambridge. 

1884. 
Wood,  A.     Athenae  Oxonienses.     Ed.  Bliss.     4  vols.     London.     1813-1820. 

Hist,  et  Antiquitates  Univ.  Oxon.     Ed.  Gutch.     2  vols.     Oxford.     1791-C. 

Colleges  and  Halls  of  Oxford,  with  the  'Fasti  Oxon.'    Ed.  Gutch.    Oxford. 

1790. 

G.     Topography 

Camden,  W.  Britannia.  London.  1586.  Ed.  Gibson  and  Gough.  3  vols.  London. 
1789. 

Leland,  J.     Itinerary.     Ed.  Hearne.     9  vols.     Oxford.     1770. 

Norden,  Saxton.  and  Speed's  maps.  Pul)lished  lGOO-1620.  Among  the  Cotton  Cliartcrs 
in  the  British  Museum  MSS.  Department  are  a  number  of  unpublished  conlt-mpo- 
rary  maps,  plans,  sketches  of  fortittcations  in  England  and  ai)road,  eg.  Boul(>gne, 
Calais,  etc.,  which  are  necessary  for  a  clear  understanding  of  military  operations. 
Published  contemporary  maps  are  very  scarce.  Cf.  .1.  P.  Anderson,  British 
Topography,  London,  1881. 

Stow,  J.     Survey  of  London.     1598.     Ed.  Strype.     2  vols.     London.     1720. 

C.    M.    H.     II.  ^^ 


CHAPTER   XY 


PHILIP  AND   MARY 

{Chiefly  supplementary  to   Bibliography  for   Chapter  XIV,   the   authorities  being,  in 
many  cases,  the  same) 

MANUSCRIPTS 
A.     State  Papeks  and  Correspondence 

The  Domestic  State  Papers  of  Mary's  reign  preserved  in  the  Record  OflSce  are 
comprised  in  fourteen  volumes  for  England,  with  eight  volumes  of  Addenda;  two 
volumes  for  Ireland  and  part  of  one  for  Scotland.  Of  the  transcripts  of  Papers  at 
Simancas  by  G.  A.  Bergenroth  at  the  British  Museum  only  a  small  portion  (Add.  MSS. 
28597,  flf.  110-221)  relate  to  the  reign  of  Mary. 

B.    Calendars  of  State  Papers  and  Correspondence 
I.     Domestic 

1.  Calendar  of  State  Papers  of  the  Reigns  of  Edward  VI,  Mary,  Elizabeth,  ed. 
by  R.  Lemon.  1856.  2.  Foreign.  Calendar  of  State  Papers  of  the  Reign  of  Mary, 
ed.  by  William  B.  TurubuU.  1861.  [This  volume  contains  errors  in  the  assigned 
dates,  corrections  of  which  are  given  in  A.  O.  Meyer,  Die  Englische  Diplomatic  in 
Deutschland,  etc.,  pp.  109-111.]  3.  Calendar  of  State  Papers  and  Manuscripts  relat- 
ing to  English  Aflairs  in  the  Archives  of  Venice  and  other  Libraries  in  Northern 
Italy.  Edited  by  Rawdon  Brown,  vol.  v  (1534-155'!) ;  vol.  vi  (1554-1558).  Catalogue 
des  Manuscrits  Frau^ais.  Tome  1",  Ancien  Fonds.  Paris.  1868.  Nos.  2846,  2933, 
5113,  5127.  Letters  and  Memorials  of  State  in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Mary,  etc. 
Translated  from  the  Originals  at  Penshurst  in  Kent.  By  Arthur  Collins.  2  vols. 
1746. 

II.     Other  Collections 

1.  Calendar  of  the  MSS.  belonging  to  the  Marquis  of  Salisbury,  preserved  at 
Hatfield  House,  published  by  the  Historical  MSS.  Commission.  Pt  1,  pp.  93-94; 
No.  375  (where  for  1551  read  1553)  supplies  facts  relating  to  Mary's  movements 
subsequent  to  Edward's  death;  see  also  pp.  123,  125.  Pt  2,  pp.  85,  146,  241,  243, 
269,  288,  291-293,  332,  345  [useful  generally  for  precedents  established  in  Mary's 
reign].  2.  Calendar  of  MSS.  belonging  to  the  Corporation  of  Reading:  Bin  Kurtzc 
anzeygung  der  ding,  so  sich  in  Eugellandt  zwischen  den  Konigllchen  Majestaten, 
Konig  und  Konigin  und  dem  Cardinal  Polura  verloffen  haben  [1554].  xiii.  284-295. 
3.     Calendar  of  IviSS.  belonging  to  Sir  Richard  Sutton,  pp.  66-67,  89-92. 

802 


BMiogniphij  803 


C.     Diplomatic 

1.  Commendone,  I.  F.  Lettere,  in  Miscellauea  Ui  Storia  Italiana.  Vol.  vi.  18G5. 
2.  Michiel,  Giovanni,  Les  D^pechea  de,  Ainbassaduur  de  Venisc  en  Anglcterrc  pen- 
dant les  annfies  de  1554  s\  1557,  dechittrfies  et  publiees  d'apr6s  les  documents  conserves 
aux  archives  natiouales  de  Venise,  par  P.  Friedinann.  Venice,  18GU.  [In  llulinn; 
Friedmann's  discovery  of  tlie  key  to  the  ciplier  was  a  memorable  achievement.  The 
letters  addressed  to  the  Senate  of  Venice  are  of  tlie  hijjiiest  interest,  although,  unfor- 
tunately, those  for  1554  are  lost;  they  inclutle  his  ■  Report  of  England"  made  in  1557 
(a  description  decried  by  Froude  but  praised  by  Uawdon  Brown),  to  be  found  in  Eng- 
lish in  Ellis,  Original  Letters  (2nd  series),  vol.  ii;  also  in  Venetian  Calendar,  vol.  vi, 
pt  2,  1043-1085.]  3.  Navagero,  Card.  M.  Bernardo,  Kelazione  alia  Ser™*  liep"^*  di 
Venezia  tornando  di  Konia  Ambasciatore  appresso   del    Pontetlce   I'aolo    IV.      1858. 

4.  Noailles,  Ambassades  de  Messieurs  de,  en  Angleterre.  Ed.  I'Abbt  Vertot.  5  tomes. 
Leyden.  1763.  Of  these  letters  the  originals  are  partly  preserved  in  Brussels  and 
partly  no  longer  to  be  found.  Transcripts  however  are  in  the  Bibliotheijue  Nationale 
in  Paris  as  follows:  Archives  des  attaires  CtraugCres,  mCmoires  et  documents,  fonds 
divers,  14  (Angleterre,  12),  1553-1557.  Copie  du  journal  des  voyages  de  Fran9ois  de 
Noailles  en  Angleterre,  pendant  I'ambassade  de  son  f  rere  Antoine  de  Noailles.  E.xtraits 
et  analyses  des  documents  de  la  Con-espondance  politi«iue  d'.Vngleterre  pendant  les  an>- 
bassades  d'Antoine  de  Noailles  (mai  1553-mai  155G),  Gilles  de  Noailles  (mai-nov.  1556), 
Fran5ois  de  Noailles  (oct.  1556-juill.  1557),  par  de  Valincourt.  15  (Angleterre,  13), 
1556-1560.  Recueil  de  copies  de  documents  relatifs  i  I'fecosse :  lettres  des  aml)assa- 
deurs  de  France  en  Angleterre,  etc.  According  to  P.  Friedmann,  not  more  than  a 
fourth  part  of  the  Noailles  correspondence  is  included  in  the  volumes  published  by  the 
Abbe  de  Vertot.  [Thirty  volumes  of  the  correspondence  of  this  celel)ratod  family  of 
diplomatists,  formerly  preserved  in  the  library  of  the  Louvre,  were  burnt  in  1S71. 
See  Louis  Paris,  Les  Papiers  des  Noailles  de  la  Bibliothfique  du  Louvre.    Paris.     1875.] 

5.  Renard,  Simon,  Letters  to  and  from  the  Emperor  Charles  V.  Printed  in  Papiers 
d'Etat  du  Cardinal  de  Granvelle.  Vols,  in  and  iv.  Pul)li6s  sous  la  direction  de  .M.  Ch. 
Weiss.  Paris.  Imprimerie  Royale.  1841.  The  originals  are  in  the  public  library  at 
Besan^on.  Of  these,  some  of  which  are  not  included  in  the  volumes  edited  by  Weiss, 
a  complete  enumeration  is  given  by  M.  A.  Caston  in  Catalogue  Gen6rale  des  Manuscrits 
des  Bibliotheques  publiques  de  France,  Dl'partpments,  vol.  x.x.xiii.  The  letters  included 
by  Weiss  are  distinguished  by  a  W.  Other  correspondence  of  Renard  and  Jean  Schyf  re 
was  formerly  preserved  in  the  Archives  du  Royaume  de  Belgique  in  Brussels,  but  has 
partly  disappeared.  Transcripts  of  the  portion  20  Feb.  1553  to  15  June  1554  are,  how- 
ever, in  the  Record  Office  Transcripts  (Sect,  ii,  vols,  cxi.v,  cxLVi),  and  were  used  both 
by  Tytler  and  Froude. 


D.       COLLKCTIONS   OF    PkIV.\TK   LkTTKUS 

Copia  d' una  Lcttera  d' Angleterra,  nella  quale  narra  l' cntrata  dell'  Card.  Polo  in 
Inghilterra  per  la  conversione  di  quella  Isola  alia  Fede  Catholica.     Milan.     1554. 
Poll  Epistolae.     5  vols.     Brescia.     1744-57. 


E.       CONTKMPORAUY    ClIKONICLra,   TUACTS,    KTC. 

Accession  (the)  of  Queen  Mary:  being  the  contemporary  Narrative  of  Antonio  de 
Guaras,  a  Spanish  Merchant  resident  in  London.  Edited  with  an  Introduction, 
Translation,  Notes,  and  an  Appendix  of  Documents.  Including  a  contemporary 
Ballad  in  Fac-simile,  by  R.  Garnett.     London.     1802. 


804  PMlq:)  and  Mary 


Annales,  or  A  General  Chronicle  of  England.  Begun  by  John  Stow  and  augmented 
with  Matters  forraigne  and  domestique,  ancient  and  moderne,  unto  the  end  of  the 
present  yeere  1631.     By  Edmund  Howes,  Gent.     London.     1631. 

Chronicle  of  the  Grey  Friars.     Edited  by  J.  G.  Nichols.     Camden  Society.     1852. 

Chronicle  of  Queen  Jane  and  of  Two  Years  of  Queen  Mary  and  especially  of  the 
Rebellion  of  Sir  Thomas  Wyat,  written  by  a  Resident  in  the  Tower  of  London. 
Ed.  by  J.  G.  Nichols.  Camden  Society.  1850.  [The  '  Resident '  was  probably 
one  Rowland  Lea.] 

Florebellus,  Ant.,  Mutinensis,  ad  Philippum  et  Mariam  reges  de  restituta  in  Auglia 
Religioue  Oratio.     Lovanii.     1555.     [Floribelli  was  bishop  of  Lavello.] 

Guidus,  Ant.  Oratio  in  funere  Mariae  Brittaniae  Reginae  ad  Cardinales  Regumque 
Rerumpublicarum  Legatos  Romae  habita  viii  ante  Idas  Mart.  1559.  Romae,  ex 
Officina  Salviana,  1559. 

Grafton,  Ri.  Chronicle  at  large  and  meere  History  of  the  Affayres  of  Englande.  Ed, 
Sir  H.  Ellis.    London.     1809. 

Gray,  G.  J.  General  Index  to  Hazlitt's  Handbook  of  Bibliographical  Collections 
(London,  1893),  pp.  494  and  597. 

Journey  of  the  Queen's  Ambassadors  to  Rome,  anno  1555.  Hardwicke  State  Papers. 
Vol.  I. 

The  Primer  in  Latin  and  English  (after  the  Use  of  Sarum)  with  many  godlye  and 
devonte  Prayers.  .  .  .  Where  unto  is  added  a  playne  and  godlye  treatise  con- 
cerning the  Masse.     John  Wa^ylande.     London.     1555. 

Proctor,  Jo.,  Historic  of  Wyates  Rebellion.  Printed  in  Grosse's  Antiquarian  Reper- 
tory, m,  05-115.     London.     1808.     [The  narrative  of  a  strong  Romanist.] 

Eosso,  Giuglio  Baviglio.  I  successi  d'  Inghilterra  dopo  la  morte  di  Odoardo  VI  flno 
alia  giunta  in  quel  regno  di  Don  Filippo  d'  Austria,  princ.  di  Spagna.  Ferrara. 
1560.  [The  Venetian  edition  of  1558  (which  is  that  used  by  Froude)  is  mutilated 
and  does  not  bear  the  writer's  name.] 


BlOGR.'VPHIES 

Beccadelli,  Ludovico.  The  Life  of  Cardinal  Reginald  Pole,  written  originally  in  Italian, 
translated  into  English  with  Notes  critical  and  historical.  By  B.  Pye.  London. 
1776.     [Beccadelli,  or  Beccatelli,  was  Pole's  secretary.] 

Carew,  Sir  Peter,  Life  of,  by  John  Hooker  (or  Vowell).  Edited  by  Sir  John  Maclean. 
Loudon.     1857. 

Dormer.  Jane.  Duchess  of  Feria,  Life  of  [by  Henry  Clifford,  her  Secretary],  Edited 
by  Estcourt  and  Stevenson.     London.     1887, 

Hoby,  Sir  Thos.  Travel  and  Life  of  (1547-1564),  written  by  himself.  Camden  Mis- 
cellany.    Vol.  X, 


Education 

1.  Letter  of  Queen  Mary  to  the  bishopp  of  Winchester,  chancellor  of  our  Uni- 
versity of  Cambridge,  20  Aug.  1553.  2.  Mere,  J.,  Queen  Mary's  Visitation  [of  the 
University  of  Cambridge],  Nov.  1556.  3.  Ordinationes  Reginaldi  Poll  pro  Regimine 
Universitatis,  item  pro  Directione  et  salubri  Regimine  CoUegiorum,  Aularum  seu 
Domorum  ejusdem  Universitatis  Cantabr.  21  Nov.  1557.  The  foregoing  all  in  Lamb,  J., 
Collection  of  Letters,  Statutes  and  other  Documents  from  the  MS.  Library  of  Corpus 
Christ!  College.     London.     1838. 


Bibllo(jr((j)hij  805 


SECONDARY   AUTHORITIES 


Genkual 


Armstrong,  E.    The  Emperor  Charles  V.     2  vols.     London.     1902. 

Brosch,  M.     Geschichte  vou  England.     Vol.  vi.    Gotlia.     1890. 

Castelnau,    Mich.,   de    Mauvissifere.      xM^moires.      Eil.   J.    le    Laboureur.      Brussels. 

1731. 
Druffel.  A.  von.     Briefe  und  Akten  zur  Gcsch.  des  IG  Jahrhunderts.     4  vols,     1873-96 

(vol.  IV). 

Forneron,  H.     Histoire  de  Philippe  II.     2  vols.     Paris.     1881. 

Friedmann,  P.  New  Facts  in  the  History  of  Mary,  Queen  of  England.  Macraillan's 
Mag.  XIX,  1-12. 

Griffet,  H.  Nouveaux  ^claircissements  sur  I'histoire  de  Marie,  reinc  d'Angleterre. 
Paris.     1776. 

Henne,  Alexandre.  Histoire  du  regne  de  Charles-Quint  en  Belgicjue.  4  vols.  Bru.s- 
sels.     1866. 

Heyiyn,  Jo.  Examen  Historicuin,  or  Discovery  and  Examination  of  the  Mistakes, 
Falsities  and  Defects  in  some  Modern  Histories.     London.     1659, 

Motley,  J.  L.     Rise  of  the  Dutch  Republic.     "Vol.  i.     Loudon.     1855. 

Rauke,  L.  von.  Die  romischen  Papste.  Vol.  i.  Vol.  xx.wii  of  Sammtliche  Werke. 
Leipzig.     1874  etc. 

Relations  poUtiques  des  Pays-Bas  et  de  I'Angleterre  sous  le  rSgne  de  Philippe  II,  pul> 
li^es  par  M.  le  Baron  de  Lettenhove.  10  vols.  Vol.  i  :  Depuis  I'.-Vbdication  de 
Charles-Quint  jusqu'au  Depart  de  Philippe  II  pour  I'Espagne  (25  Oct.  1555  — 
24  Aout  1559).     Brussels.     1882. 

Stone,  J.  M.     History  of  Mary  I,  Queen  of  England.     London.     1901. 

Wiesener,  L.  The  Youth  of  Queen  Elizabeth  (1533-1558).  2  vols.  English  Transla- 
tion.    London.     1879. 

Zimmermann,  A.     Marie  die  Katholische.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1890. 

BlOGKAPIIICAL 

Duruy,  G.     Le  Cardinal  Carlo  Caraffa.     Paris.     1882. 

Freeman,  E.  A.     Cardinal  Pole.     Essays,  4th  Series.     (First  published  in  Sat.  Rev, 

1869.) 
Graziani,  Ant.   Maria,  bishop  of  Amelia.     De  Vita  L  F,  Commendoria,  Caidinalis, 

Libri  iv.     Paris.     1669,    French  translation  by  Fl^chier.     Paris.     1G94. 
Hook,   W.  F.  (Dean).    Lives  of  Cranmer  and  Pole  in  Archbishops  of  Cantcrtjury. 

N.  S.     Vols.  II,  III.     London.     1868,  1869. 
Hume,  M.  A.  S.     Visit  of  Pliilip  II  (1554).     English  Hist,  Review.     1892. 
Lee,  F.  G.     Reginald  Pole,  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.     London.     1888. 
Madden,  Sir  F.     Privy  Purse  Expenses  of  Princess  Mary,  with  Memoir  am!   Notes. 

London.     1831. 
Phillips.  Thos.     History  of  the  Life  of  Cardinal  Polo.     Oxfonl.     1764. 
Pope,   Sir  Thos.     Life  of,  by  Thomas  Wharton.     London.     1772.     (See  also  Life  in 

D.  N.  B.  and  English  Hist.  Review,  \i,  282-.) 
Zimmermann,    A.       Kardinal    Pole,    sein    Lcbcn    und    seine    Schrifteu.       Ratisbon. 

1893. 

Si'KciAL  Srn.iKcrs 

Creighton,  C,     History  of  Epidemics  in  Britain.     Cambridge.     1891. 

Leaciam,  I.  S.     Narrative  of  the  Pursuit  of  the  English  Refugees  In  Germany  under 

Queen  Mary.     Trans,  of  Royal  Historical  Society.     189G. 
Verney  Family,  Letters  and  Papers  of  tiie,  edited  by  J.    Bruce.     Camden  Society. 

1853.     [Important  for  the  Dudley  Conspiracy.] 


CHAPTER   XVI 

THE   ANGLICAN    SETTLEMENT   AND    THE    SCOTTISH    REFOE- 

MATION 

The  chief  bibliographical  works  concerning  this  period  of  British  history  |ire 
(1)  J.  Scott's  Bibliography  of  Works  i-elatiug  to  Mary  Queen  of  Scots,  1544-1700 
(printed  for  the  Edinburgh  Bibliographical  Soc,  1896),  and  (2)  H.  M.  Dexter's 
Congregationalism  (for  which  see  below  under  II.  B.).  Catalogues  of  early  printed 
books  in  the  great  libraries  give  some  assistance. 

The  principal  manuscript  materials  in  England  that  have  not  yet  been  printed  or 
adequately  abstracted  in  Calendars  are  the  State  Papers,  Domestic,  at  the  Record 
Office.  There  are  a  few  volumes  at  the  British  Museum  containing  State  Papers,  to 
which  the  class  catalogue  in  the  MS.  Room  serves  as  a  guide.  The  Parker  MSS.  at 
Corpus  Christi  Coll.  Carab.  have  been  much  used  by  historians  and  publishers  of  docu- 
ments, but  a  full  calendar  is  a  desideratum. 


I.     GENERAL   HISTORY   OF   ENGLAND   AND    SCOTLAND 
A.    Records,  State  Papers,  and  Letters 

Acts  of  the  Parliament  of  Scotland  (Official  ed.).     Vol.  ii.     1814. 

Acts  of  the  [English]  Privy  Council,  vol.  vn  (1558-70).     London.      1893. 

Anderson,  J.     Collections  relating  to  the  History  of  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.     Edinburgh. 

1727-8. 
Beale,  R.     Argument  touching  the  validity  of  the  marriage  of  Charles  Brandon.     In 

MS.  Camb.  Univ.,  Dd.  iii.  85.     [See  Diet.  Nat.  Biog.  iv,  6.] 
Birrel,  R.     Diary.     Fragments  of  Scotch  History,  ed.  J.  G.  Dalyell.     Edinburgh.     1798. 
Browne,  A.,  and  Bacon,  N.     Tracts  on  the  Succession  to  the  Crown.     In  Booth,  N., 

The  Right  of  Succession  to  the  Crown.     1723. 
Castelnau,  M.  de.    Memoires.     Ed.  J.  le  Laboureur,  Bruxelles,  1731.     (1st  ed.  Paris, 

1G60.) 
Correspondencia  de  Felipe  II.     Documentos  inSditos  para  la  Historia  de  Espaiia,  ed. 

Navarrete  and  others.     Vol.  lxxxvii.     Madrid.     1886. 
Dewes,  Simonds.     Journal  of  the  Parliaments  of  Queen  Elizabeth.     London.     1682. 
Diurnal  of  Remarkable  Occurrents.     Bannatyne  Club.     1833. 
Doleman,  R.  [i.e.   Parsons,  R.].      A  Conference  about  the   next  Succession  to  the 

Crown.     [StOmer.]     1594. 
Dyson,  H.    Queene  Elizabeth's  Proclamations,  1618.     (Brit.  Mus.  Grenv.  6463.) 
Egerton  Papers.     Camden  Soc.     London.     1840. 
Ellis,  H.     Original   Letters,   1st  Ser.,  vol.    ii;   2nd  Ser.,   vol.  ii;   3rd   Ser.,   vol.    in. 

London.     1824-46. 


Bibliography  807 


Exchequer  Rolls  of  Scotland.     Vols,  xviii,  xi.\.     Edinburgh.     1898. 

Ferrlfere,  H.  de  la.     Letties  dc  Catherine  de  M^dicis.     Vol.  i.     Paris.     1880. 

Forbes,  P.     Full  View  of  the  Public  Transactions  in  the  Uelgn  of  Eli/.abelii.     2  vols. 

London.     1740-1. 
Froude,  J.  A.     Spanish  Transcripts.     Brit.  Mus.  MS.  Addit.  '2G0JG. 
Gachard,  L.  P.     Correspondance  de  Marguerite  d'Antriche.     Vol.  i.     Brussels.     1867. 

Correspondance  de  Philippe  II.     A'ols.  i,  ii.     Brussels.     1848-61. 

Gonsalez,  T.     Documents  from  Simancas.     Trunsl.  S.  Hall.     London.     18C5. 

Hales,  J.  Declaration  of  the  Succession  of  the  Crown,  1563.  In  [Harbin,  G.]  Hered- 
itary Right  of  the  Crown.     London.     17ia. 

Hamilton  MSS.     Eleventh  Rep.  of  Hist.  MSS.  Com.  App.  vi.     London.     1887. 

Hamilton  Papers.     Vols,  i,  ii.     Edinburgh.     1«;)0-L'. 

Hardwicke,  Philip,  Earl  of.     Miscellaneous  State  Papers.     Vol.  i.     London.     1778. 

Haynes,  S.     Burghley  State  Papers.     London.     1740. 

Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons  (Official  ed.).     Vol.  i,  no  date. 

Journal  of  the  House  of  Lords  (Official  ed.).     Vol.  i,  no  date. 

Keith,  R.  History  of  the  Alfairs  of  Church  and  State  in  Scotland.  Spottiswoode  Soc. 
Edinburgh.     1844.     (1st  ed.  Edinburgh,  1734.) 

Kervyn  de  Lettenhove.  Relations  politiques  des  Pays-Bas  et  de  rAnglcterre.  Vols, 
i-ni.     Brussels.     1882-3. 

Labanofi',  A.     Lettres  inedites  de  Marie  Stuart.     Paris.     1839. 

Lettres,  instructious  et  m^moires  de  Marie  Stuart.     London.     1844. 

Languet,  Hubert.     Epistolae.     Halle.     lOUi). 

Leicester's  Commonwealth.  [London.]  1G41.  (Erroneously  attributed  to  Parsons  the 
Jesuit.     For  its  history  see  Diet.  Nat.  Biog.  .wi,  121.] 

Members  of  Parliament,  Returns.     Fart  i.     Blue  book,  1878. 

Nuutiaturberichte  aus  Deutschland,  1500-72.  Hist.  Com.  d.  Akad.  d.  "Wissensch. 
Vienna.     1897. 

Paris,  L.     Negotiations  .  .  .  relatives  an  rfegne  de  Fran9ois  II.     Paris.     1841. 

Pollen,  J.  H.  Papal  Negotiations  with  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.  Scot.  Hist.  Soc.  Edin- 
burgh.    1901. 

Prothero,  G.  "W.    Select  Statutes  and  other  Constitutional  Documents.    London.    1894. 

Register  of  the  Great  Seal  of  Scotland  (1546-80).     Edinburgh.     1886. 

Register  of  the  Privy  Council  of  Scotland.     Vol.  i  (1545-69).     Edinburgh.     1877. 

'  Roman  Transcripts.'  MS.  at  Record  Office.  [Copies  made  in  various  Roman 
Archives.] 

Rutland  Manuscripts.     Hist.  MSS.  Com.  Rep.  xii,  App.  4.     London.     18S.s. 

Rymer,  T.     J^oedera.     Vol.  xv.     London.     1713. 

State  Papers.  Borders  of  England  and  Scotland.  Calendar.  Vol.  i.  Edinburgh. 
1894. 

State  Papers,  Domestic.  MS.  at  Record  Office.  [The  published  Calendar.  Vols,  i  and 
vii,  merely  indicates  the  nature  of  the  documents.] 

State  Papers,  Foreign.     Elizabeth.     Calendar.     Vols.  i-vi.     London.     lH(;;',-9. 

State  Papers.     Hatfield  or  Cecil  MSS.  Calendar.    Vol.  i.     London.     1883,  repr.  1895. 

State  Papers  of  Sir  Ralph  Sadler,  ed.  Clifford.     Edinburgh.     1809. 

State  Papers.  Scotland  and  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.  Calendar.  VoL.i.  Edinburgh. 
1898. 

State  Papers,  Spanish  (1558-G7).    Calendar.    London.     1892. 

State  Papers,  Venetian.     Calendar.     Vol.  vni.     London.     1890. 

Statutes  of  the  Realm  (Official  ed.).  Vol.  iv.  1819.  [The  original  Acts  of  Parliament 
preserved  in  the  Parliament  Office  sometimes  supply  a  little  additional  infor- 
mation.] 

Stevenson,  J.  Selections  from  manuscripts  relating  to  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.  Mait- 
land  Club.     Edinburgh.     1837. 

Teulet,  A.  Papiers  d'6tat  .  .  .  relatifs  k  I'histoire  de  I'Ecosse.  Bannatyne  Club. 
Paris.     1851. 

Relations  politiques  de  la  France  et  de  I'Espagnc  avec  rEcosse.    Paris.     18G2. 


808      The  Anglican  Settlement  and  the  Scottish  Reformation 

Turba,  G.     Venetianische  Depeschen  vora  Kaiserhofe.     Vol.  in.    Vienna.     1895. 
Strickland,  A.     Letters  of  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.     London.     1842. 
Weiss,  C.     Papiers  d'etat  du  Cardinal  Granvelle.    Vols,  iv-vi.     Paris.     1843-6. 
Wright,  T.    Queen  Elizabeth  and  her  Times.     London.     1838. 


B.     Chronicles  and  Early  Histories 

Beaugue,   J.    de.     L'histoire  de   la  Guerre  d'Escosse.     Maitland    Club.     Edinburgh. 

1830.     Another  edition,  Bordeaux,  1862. 
Brantome.     fEuvres  completes.     Ed.  L.  Lalanne.     Paris.     1864-82. 
Buchanan,  George.     Rerum  Scoticarura  Historia.    Edinburgh.     1583. 
Burghley,  Life  of.     In  P.  Peck,  Desiderata  Curiosa.    London.    1779.    (1st  ed.  in  1732.) 
Camden,  W.     Annales.    London.     1615. 

Complaynt,  the,  of  Scotlande,  1549.     Early  Eng.  Text  Soc.     London.     1872. 
Conaeus,  G.     Vita  Mariae  Stuartae.     Wiirzburg  and  Rome.     1624. 
Condd,  M6moires  de.     The  Hague.     1743. 

Hayward,  J.     Annals  of  Queen  Elizabeth.     Camden  Soc.    London.     1840. 
Herries,  Lord.     Historical  Memoirs.     Abbotsfoi'd  Club.     Edinburgh.     1836. 
Holinshed,  R.     Chronicle.     London.     1586-7.     [As  to  the  rare  first  edition,  see  Diet. 

Nat.  Biog.  XXVII,  131.] 
Jebb,  S.     De  vita  et  rebus  gestis  Mariae  .  .  .  quae  scriptis  tradidere  auctores  sedecim. 

London.     1725. 
[Lesley,  J.]     A  defence  of  the  Honour  of  .  .  .  Marie,  Queene  of  Scotland.     London. 

1569.     [See  Scott,  Bibliography,  pp.  20,  23.] 
Lesley,  J.     De  origine  .  .   .   Scotorum.     Romae.     1578. 

History  of  Scotland.     Scot.  Text  Soc.     Edinburgh.     1888. 

Lyndsay  of  Pitscottie.     Historic  of  Scotland.     Scot.  Text  Soc.    Edinburgh.     1899. 
Machyn's  Diary.     Camden  Soc.     London.     1844.     [See  Eng.  Hist.  Rev.  xi,  282.] 
Maitland,  J.     Narrative  of  the  Principal  Acts  of  the  Regency.     Edinburgh.     1822. 
Melville,  James.     Memoirs.     Bannatyne  Club.     Edinburgh.     1827.     (Maitland  Club.) 

Edinburgh.     1833.     (1st.  ed.  1683.) 
Naunton,  R.     Fragmenta  Regalia.     London.     1641.      [For  the  various   editions,  see 

Diet.  Nat.  Biog.  xl,  128.] 
Nichols,  J.    Progresses  of  Queen  Elizabeth.    London.    1823.    Vol.  i.    p.  60  :  Coronation 

Service.] 
Stow,  J.     Annales  of  England.     London.     1605.     (1st  ed.  1592.) 

Memoranda.      Three  Fifteenth    Century   Chronicles.     Camden    Soc.     London. 

1880. 

Wriothesley,  C.     Chronicle.    Camden  Soc.     London.     1875. 


C.    Modern  Works 

Beesley,  E.  S.    .Queen  Elizabeth.     London.     1892, 

Bekker,  E.     Beitrage   zur  englischen   Geschichte   im   Zeitalter  Elisabeths.     Giessen. 

1887.     Elisabeth  und  Leicester.     Giessen.     1890. 
Brosch,  M.     Habsburgische  Verraalungsplane  mit  Elisabeth.     Mitth.  d.  Instituts  fiir 

osterreich.     Geschichtsforschung.     x,  121.     Innsbruck.     1889. 
Brown,  P.  Hume.     History  of  Scotland.     Vols,  i,  ii.     Cambridge.     1899-1902. 
Brugmans,  H.     Engeland  en  de  Nederlanden,  1558-67.     Groningen.     1892. 
Burton,  J.  H.     History  of  Scotland.     Ed.  2.     Edinburgh.     1873. 
Chalmers,  G.     Life  of  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.     London.     1818. 
Creighton,  M.  (Bishop).     Queen  Elizabeth.     London.     1896. 
Cunningham,  W.     Gx-owth  of  English   Industry  and   Commerce  in  Modern   Times. 

Cambridge,  1903,  pp.  127-137.     [The  recoinage  of  1561.] 


Bihliogrdphii  809 


Duruy,  G.     Le  Cardinal  Carlo  Carafla.     Paris.     1882. 

Fleming,  D.  Hay.     Mary  Queen  of  Scot.s  from  her  birth  until  her  flight  into  England. 

Loudon.     1897. 
Forneron,  II.     Les  dues  de  Guise  et  Icur  ^poque.     Paris.     1877. 

Ilistoire  de  Philippe  II.     Paris.     1881. 

Froude,  J.  A.     History  of  England.     Kcign  of  Elizabeth.    London.     1864. 
Gairdner,  J.     The  Death  of  Amy  Robsart.     Eng.  Hist.  Rev.  i,  235;  xiii,  83. 
Ilallam,  H.     Constitutional  History  of  England.     London.     1832. 
Henderson,  T.  F.     Lives  of  Mary  Stuart,  Douglas  (Lady  Margaret),  Hamilton  (James, 

3rd  Earl  of  Arran),  Maitland  (William),  Stewart  (Lord  James),  Stewart  (.Matthew, 

Earl  of  Lennox),  in  Diet.  Nat.  Biog. 
Hosack,  J.     Mary  Queen  of  Seots  and  her  Accusers.     Ed.  2.     Edinburgh.     1870. 
Hume,  M.  A.     The  Courtships  of  Queen  Elizabeth.     London.     189G. 

The  great  Lord  Curglilcy.     London.     1808. 

Lang,  A.     History  of  Scotland.     Vols,  i,  ii.     Edinburgh.     1900-2. 

Scandal  about  Queen  Elizabeth.     [Amy  Robsart.]     Blackwood's  Magazine,  (;i,iii, 

209.     Edinburgh.     1893. 

Lee,  S.  L.     Life  of  Robert  Dudley.     In  Diet.  Nat.  Biog.  xvi,  112  [for  death  of  Lady 

Robert,  with  bibliography]. 
Lingard,  J.     History  of  England.     Ed.  G.     London.     1854. 
Marcks,  E.     Konigin  Elisabeth.     Bielefeld.     1897. 

Mathieson,  W.  L.     Politics  and  Religion  in  Scotland.     Glasgow.     1902. 
Maurenbrecher,  W.     Beitriige  zur  Geschichte  Maximilians  II.     Hist.  Zcitschrift,  vol. 

XXXII  (1874),  pp.  221,  277. 
Mignet,  F.  A.  M.     Ilistoire  de  Marie  Stuart.    Ed.  G.     Paris.     1885. 
MiUler,  T.     Das  Konklave  Pius  IV.     Gotha.     1889. 
Nares,  E.     Memoirs  of  Lord  Burghley.     London.     1823-38. 
Paillard,  C.     La  conjuration  d'Amboise.     Revue  historique.     Vol.  xiv  (1880),  pp.  01. 

311. 
Philippson,  M.     La  contra-r^volution  religieuse.     Bruxelles.     1884. 

Histoire  du  regne  de  Marie  Stuart.     Paris.     1891-2. 

Pollen,  J.  H.     Papers  published  in  'The  Month,'  1900-2,  and  in  Dublin  Review,  Jan. 

1903. 
Rait,  R.  S.     The  Scottish  Parliament.     London.     1901. 

Relations  between  England  and  Scotland.     London.     1901. 

Ranke,  L.  v.  Englische  Geschichte.  Vol.  xiv  of  Siimmtliche  Werke.  Berlin. 
1874  etc. 

Reimann,  E.  Der  Streit  zwischen  Papstthum  und  Kaiserthum  im  Jahre  1558.  For- 
schungen  zur  deutschen  Geschichte.     Vol.  v,  p.  291.     Gottingen.     18G5. 

Ritter,  M.  Deutsche  Geschichte  im  Zeitalter  der  Gegenreformation.  Vol.  i.  Stutt- 
gart.    1889. 

Rogers,  J.  E.  T.  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices.  Vol.  iv,  pp.  197  fl'.  [Tiie 
recoinage  of  15G1.]     Oxford.     1882. 

Ruble,  A.  de.     Antoine  de  Bourbon  et  Jeanne  d'Albret.     Paris.     1881-2. 

Le  traits  de  Cateau-Cambr6sis.     Paris.     1889. 

La  premiere  jeunesse  de  Marie  Stuart.     Paris.     1891. 

Rye,  W.     The  Murder  of  Amy  Robsart.     London.     1885. 

Schlossberger,  A.  Verhandlungen  iil)er  die  beabsichtigte  Vermilhlung  des  Erzherzogs 
Karl  mit  der  Konigin  Elizabeth.  Forschungen  zur  deutsciien  Geschichte.  Vol.  \ . 
p.  1.     GiJttingen.     18C5. 

Skelton,  J.     Maitland  of  Lethington.     Ed.  2.     Edinburgh.     1894. 

Storm,  G.     Maria  Stuart.     Uebersetzt  von  P.  Wittmann.     Munich.     1896. 

Swinburne,  A.  C.  Mary  Queen  of  Scots.  Encyclop.  Britan.  Vol.  xv.  Edinburgh. 
1883. 

Tait,  J.     Life  of  Mary  of  Guise  in  Diet.  Nat.  Biog. 

Tytler,  P.  F.     History  of  Scotland.     London.     187G. 

Voss  W.     Die  Verhandlungen  Pius  IV  mit  den  katholischenMilchton.     Leipzig.     18S7. 


810      The  A7iglican  Settlement  and  the  Scottish  Reformation 

Wertheimer,   E.      Heirathsverhandlungen   zwischen  Elizabeth  und  Erzherzog   Karl, 

Hist.  Zeitschrift.     Vol.  xl  (1878),  p.  385. 
Wiesener,  L.     The  Youth  of  Queen  Elizabeth.     Engl.  Transl.     London.     1879. 
"Wolf,  G.     Zur  Geschichte  der  deutscheu  Protestanten,  1555-9.     Berlin.     1888. 


II.     ECCLESIASTICAL   AFFAIRS    OF   ENGLAND   AND    SCOTLAND 
A.    Primary  Materials 

Bateson,  M.     A  collection  of  Original  Letters  from  the  Bishops  to  the  Privy  Council, 

1564.     Camden  Miscellany.     Vol.  ix.     Loudon.     1893. 
Book  of  the  Universal  Kirk.     Vol.  i.     Bannatyue  Club.     Edinburgh.     1839. 
Beza,  T.     Tractatus  plus  .  .  .  de  vera  excommunicatione.     London.     1590. 
Bucholtz,  F.  B.  V.     Geschichte  der  Hegierung  Ferdinand  des  Ersten.     Vienna.     1831-8. 

Vol.  IX,  pp.  699-702. 
Bullarium  Komanum.     Luxemb.     1727.     Vol.  i,  p.  840.     [Bull  of  15  Feb.  1559.]     Vol. 

II,  p.  324.     [Bull  deposing  Elizabeth.] 
Bullinger,  H.     Bullae  papisticae  .  .  .  contra  .  .  .  Angliae  Regiuam  Elizabetham  .  .  . 

defensio.     London.     1571. 
Caldervvood,    D.      History  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland.      Woodrovv  Soc.      Edinburgh. 

1842-9.     (Isted.  1678.) 
[Calvin's  Letters.]    Thesaurus  Epistolicus  Calvinianus.    Brunswick.    1872-9.    (Corpus 

Reforinatorum,  ed.  Baum,  Cunitz,  Reuss.     Vols,  xxxviii-xlviii.) 
Cardwell,  E.     Documentary  Annals  of  the  Church  of  England.     Oxford.     1839. 

History  of  Conferences.     Oxford.     1840. 

Synodalia.     Oxford.     1842. 

Catholic  Tractates  of  the  Sixteenth  Century.     Ed.  T.  G.  Law.     Scot.  Text  Soc.     Edin- 
burgh.    1901. 
[Gierke,  B.]     Fidelis  servi  subdito  infideli  responsio.     London.     1573. 
Coke,  Sir  E.     Fourth  Institute,  324  ff.     [Headship  of  Church  and  High  Commission.] 

London.     1797.     (1st  ed.  1644.) 
Confession  (The),  of  the  faythe  and  doctrine  beleued  and  professed  bj'  the  Protestantes 

of  the  Realm  of  Scotlande.     London.     1561. 
Dyer,  Sir  J.    Reports,  fo.  234,  plac.  15.     London.     1632.     [Bonner's  case:   see  also 

Curia  Regis  Rolls,  no.  1212,  Roll  13  at  Record  Office.] 
Erastus,  T.     Explicatio  gravissimae  quaestionis,  utrum  excommunicatio,  etc.    Pesclavii 

[=  London].     1589. 
Forbes-Leith,  W.     Narratives  of  Scottish  Catholics.     Edinburgh.     1885. 
Fox,  J.     Acts  and  Monuments.     London.     1844-9.     [For  early  editions,  see  Diet.  Nat. 

Biog.,  vol.  XX,  p.  147.] 
Gude  and  Godlie  Ballatis.     Ed.  A.  F.  Mitchell.     Scot.  Text  Soc.     Edinburgh.     1897. 
Heppe,  H.     The  Reformers  of  England  and  Germany.     Engl.  Transl.     London.     1859. 
Hessels,  J.  H.     Ecclesiae  Londino-Batavae  Archivum.     Vol.  i.     Cambridge.     1887. 
Hospinianus,  R.     Concordia  discors.     Geneva.     1678. 
Jewel,  J.     Works.     Parker  Soc.     Cambridge.     1845-50. 
Kausler,  E,  v.,  und  Schott,  T.     Brief wechsel  zwischen  Cristoph,  Ilerzog  v.  Wiirttem- 

berg,  und  P.  P.  Vergerius.     Tubingen.     1875. 
Knox,  J.     Works.     Ed.   D.   Laing.     Edinburgh.     1840-55;  and  for  Bannatyne  Club. 

Edinburgh.     1855-64. 
Law,  T.  G.     Abp.  Hamilton's  Catechism.     Oxford.     1884. 
Le  Plat,  J.     Monumentorum  ad  historiam  Concilii  Tridentini  .  .  .  CoUectio.     Vol.  vi, 

pp.  272-3.     Lovanii.     1781-7. 
Liturgies  set  forth  in  the  Reign  of  Elizabeth.    Ed.  Clay.     Parker  Soc.     Cambridge. 

1847. 


Bibliographtj  811 


LyiKlsay,  Sir  David.     Poetical  Works.     Ed.  Laiiig.    Edinburgh.     1879. 
Moms,  n.     Ilistoria  Provinciac  Anslicanae  Societatis  Jcsu.     St  Omer.     ICCO. 
Miiller,  E.  F.  Karl.    Die  Bekeiuitnisschriften  dur  reformiurtcn  Klrche.     Leipzig.    1903. 
Novvell,  A.     Sermon  before  Parliament.     MS.  Chains  Coll.  G4. 

Pallavicino,  S.     Vera  Conuilii  Tridentini  HLstoria.     Anlwerp.     1670.     Vol.   ii,  p.  531. 
Parker,  M.     Correspondence.     Parker  Sue.     Cambridire.     18.".3. 
Parker  Society's  Publications.     General  Index.     Cambridge.     185o. 
Reformatio  Legum,  ed.  Cardwell.     Oxford.     1850. 
Ilibier,  G.     Lettres  et  raCmoires.    Paris.     1077.     Vol.  ii,  p.  776. 

Robertson,  J.     Statuta  Eccleslae  Scotticanae.     IJannatyne  Club.     Edinburgh.     1866. 
Sanders,  N.     JNIS.   Report  to  Cardinal  Morone  of  the  "change  of  religion  in  England. 
Copy  among  '  Roman  Transcripts '  at  the  Record  Ollice. 

De  visibili  Monarchia  Ecclesiae.     Louvain.     1571. 

De  origine  .  .  .  Schismatis  Anglicani.     Edited  and    continued  by  E.   Rishton. 

Cologne.     1585. 

Saravia,  II.     De  diversis  gradibus  ministrorum.     London.     1590. 

Sarpi,  P.     Ilistoire  du  Concile  de  Trente.     Transl.   P.  F.  Ic  Couraycr.     Amsterdam. 

1736.     Vol.  II,  p.  52. 
Schafi",  P.     The  Creeds  of  the  Evangelical  Protestant  Churches.     London.     1877. 
Schickler,  F.  de.     Les  figlises  de  refuge  en  Angleterre.     Paris.     1892. 
Scott,  Hew.     Fasti  Ecclesiae  Scoticanae.     Edinburgh.     1866-71. 
Sickel,  T.     Zur  Geschichte  des  Concils  von  Trient.     Vienna.     1872. 
Somers  Tracts.     Ed.  by  Sir  W.  Scott.     Vol.  i,  pp.  Gl-85,  163-174.  189-208.     London. 

1809. 
Sparrow,  A.     A  collection  of  Articles,  Injunctions,  etc.     London.     1675. 
Spottiswoode,  J.     History  of  the  Church  and  Slate  of  Scotland.     Spottiswoode  Soc. 

Edinburgh.     1851.     (1st  ed.  London,  1655.) 
Strype.  J.     Annals  of  the  Reformation.     Oxford.     1824. 
^     Lives  of  Parker,  Grindal,  Whitgift,  Cheke,  Smitli,  Aylmer.     Oxford.     1820-2. 

[For  earlier  editions,  see  Diet.  Nat.  Biog.  lv,  69.] 
Whitgift,  J.     Works.     Parker  Soc.     Cambridge.     1851-3. 
[Whittingham,   W.]     A    Brief!'  Discours   ofl"  the  Troubles   begonne  at  Franckfonl. 

1575.     Reprinted,  1846. 

Life  of,  in  Camden  Miscellany.     Vol.  vi.    London.     1870. 

Wilkins,  D.     Concilia.     Vol.  iv.     London.     1737. 

Winzet,  N.     Certain  Tractates.     Scot.  Text  Soc.     Edinbnrgli.     1888-90. 

Ziirich  Letters  (Epistolae  Tigurinae).     Two  Series.    Parker  Soc.    Cambridge.    1842-5. 

Controversial  Tracts.  The  titles  of  the  most  important  may  be  found  in  Diet.  Nat. 
Biog.  In  the  first  years  of  the  reign  the  chief  Anglican  apologists  arc  John 
Jewel  and  Alexander  Nowell.  For  the  Roman  side  see  the  lives  of  Henry  Cole, 
Thomas  Dorman,  Thomas  Harding,  James  Harpsfield,  Nicolas  IIari)snfUI,  All)an 
Langdale,  John  Rastell,  Thomas  Stapleton  :  also  of  William  Allen.  Robert 
Parsons,  Nicholas  Sanders.  Tiie  first  stages  of  the  Puritan  dev<'lc.pni.-nt  nro 
to  be  found  rather  in  letters,  episcopal  injunctions,  etc.,  tlian  in  tracts.  But 
see  the  lives  of  Matthew  Parker  and  other  Elizabethan  bishops  of  the  first  gen- 
eration; also  those  of  Tliomas  Cartwright,  Anthony  Gill)y,  John  Fox,  Chris- 
topher Goodman,  Laurence  Humphrey,  Thomas  Lever,  Tliomas  Sampson,  and 
William  Whittingham. 

'  B.      MODKKN   WoitKS 

Bailey,  T.  J.     Ordinum  Sacroruin  in  Ecclesia  Anglicana  Defenslo.     London.     1870. 
Bellesheim,  A.     History   of    the  Catholic  Church  of  Scotland.     Trans.    O.    H.    Blair. 

Edinburgh.     1887. 
Benrath,  K.     Bernardino  Ochino.     Leipzig.     1875. 
Bonnard,  A.     Thomas  Eraste.     Lausanne.     1894. 


812      The  Anglican  Settlement  and  the  Scottish  Reformation 

Bridgett,  T.  E.     Blunders  and  Forgeries.     London.     1890.     [Ware's  forgeries.] 

and   Knox,   T.    F.       The    true    story    of    the    Catholic    Hierarchy.       London. 

1889. 

Brown,  P.  Hume.     John  Knox.     London.     1895. 

George  Buclianan.     Edinburgh.     1890. 

Burnet,    G.     History  of  the  Reformation.     Ed.    Pocock.     Oxford.      1865.     (1st  ed. 

1678-1714.) 
Churton,  R.    Life  of  Alexander  Nowell.     Oxford.     1809. 
Collier,    J.      Ecclesiastical    History.      Ed.    Barham.      London.      1840-1.      (1st    ed. 

1708-14.) 
Creighton,  M.    (Bishop).      The  Excommunication  of   Queen  Elizabeth.     Eng.  Hist. 

Rev.  VII,  81. 
Cunningham,  J.     The  Church  History  of  Scotland.     Edinburgh.     1882. 
Denny,  E.,  and  Lacey,   T.   A.     De  Hierarchia  Anglicana.     London.     1895.     Supple- 

mentura.     Romae.     1896. 
Dexter,   H.   M.      Congregationalism  as  seen  in  its  Literature.      New  York.      1880. 

[Valuable  bibliography.] 
Dimock,  N.     Dangerous  Deceits.     London.     1895. 

Vox  Liturgiae  Auglicanae.     London.     1897. 

Dixon,  R.  W.     History  of  the  Church  of  England.     London.     1878-1902. 

Dodd,  C.     Church  History  of  England.     Ed.  Tierney.     London.     1839-43. 

Dorner,  I.  A.     Geschichte  der  protestantischen  Theologie.     Munich.     1867- 

Dugdale,  H.  G.     Life  of  Edmund  Geste.     London.     1840. 

Estcourt,  E.  E.     The  Question  of  Anglican  Ordinations.     London.     1873. 

Figgis,  J.  N.     Erastus  and  Erastianism.     Journ.  of  Theol.  Studies,  ii,  Q(j.     London. 

1901. 
Forbes-Leith,   J.     La  revolution  religieuse  en  Angleterre.     Revue  des   quest,    hist., 

Lvni,  456.     Paris.     1895. 
Fuller,  T.     The  Church  History  of  Britain.     Ed.  Brewer.     Oxford.     1845.     (1st  ed. 

1655.) 
Gee,  H.     The  Elizabethan  Clergy.     Oxford.     1898. 

The  Elizabethan  Prayer-Book  and  Ornaments.    London.     1902. 

Gibson,  E.  C.  S.     The  Thirty-Nine  Articles.     Ed.  2.     London.     1898. 
Grub,  G.     Ecclesiastical  History  of  Scotland.     Edinburgh.     1861. 
Hardwick,  C.     History  of  the  Articles  of  Religion.     Cambridge.     1859. 

Heylin,  P.     Ecclesia  Restaurata.     Ed.  Robertson.     Cambridge.    1849.     (1st  ed.  1661.) 

Jacobs,  H.  E.     The  Lutheran  Movement  in  England.     Pliiladelphia.     1891. 

Kluckhohn,  A.     Friedrich  der  Fromme.     Nordlingen.     1879. 

Kugler,  B.     Christoph,  Herzog  zu  Wirtemberg.     Stuttgart.     1868. 

Kurtz,  J.  H.     Church  History.     Engl.  Transl.     London.     1888. 

Lamb,  J.     Historical  Account  of  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles.     Cambridge.     1829, 

Laurence,  R.     Barapton  Lectures  for  1804.     Ed.  3.     Oxford.     1838. 

Lechler,  G.  V.     Geschichte  der  Presbyterial-  und  Synodalverfassung.     1854. 

Lee,  F.  G.     The  Church  under  Elizabetli.     London.     1892. 

Lorimer,  P.     Life  of  Patrick  Hamilton.     Edinburgh.     1857. 

John  Knox  and  the  Church  of  England.     London.     1875. 

M^Crie,  T.     Life  of  Knox.     Ed.  Crichton.    Edinburgh.     1840.     (1st  ed.  1812.) 
MacColl,  M.     Lawlessness,  Sacei'dotalism,  and  Ritualism.     Ed.  3.     London.     1875. 

The  Reformation  Settlement.     Ed.  10.     London.     1901. 

Mackay,  M.    Lives  of  Hamilton  (Patrick),  Knox  (John),  Lindsay  (David),  in  Diet.  Xat. 

Biog. 
Maitland,  F.  W.     Elizabethan  Gleanings.     Eng.  Hist.  Rev.  xv,  120,  324,  530,  757. 
Maxwell,    A.     The   History  of  Old   Dundee.     Edinburgh.     1891,  pp.  81  fl*.     [George 

Wishart.] 
Micklethwaite,  J.  T.     The  Ornaments  of  the  Rubric.     Alcuin  Club  Tracts.     London. 

1897. 
Mitchell,  A.  F.     The  Scottish  Reformation.     Edinburgh.     1900. 


Bibliography  813 


Mulllnger,  J.  B.     History  of  the  University  of  Cainl)rid!;c  from  tlie  Koynl  Injiinclions 

of  1535.     Cambricigc.     1884. 
Neal,  ]).     History  of  the  Puritans.     London.     1754. 
Parker,  J.     Tlie  Ornaments  Uubricic.     Oxford.     1881. 

Did  Queen  Elizabeth  take  otlier  order  ?     Oxford.     1878. 

Perry,  G.  G.     History  of  tlie  English  Ciuirch.    Second  Period.    Ed.  6.    London.     1900. 

T.  W.     The  Declaration  on  Kneeling.     London.     18G3. 

Pestalozzi,  C.     lleinrich  UuUinger.     Elbcrfeld.     1858. 

Pocock,  N.  The  Reformation  Settlement  of  the  English  Church.  Eng.  Hi.^t.  Kev.  i, 
677. 

Condition  of  Morals  and  Religious  Belief  in  the  Reign  of  Edward  N'l.     Eng. 

Hist.  Rev.  X,  417. 

Preger,  W.     Matthias  Flacius  Hlyricus  Erlangen.     1859.     [Adiaphorist  controversy.] 
Proctor,  F.     History  of  the  Book  of  Common  Praver.     Ed.  W.   II.  Frere.     London. 

1902. 
PuUan,  L.     History  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.     YA.  3.     Loudon.     1901. 
Rigg,  J.  M.     Life  of  Bernardino  Ochino  in  Diet.  Nat.  Biog. 
Ruble,  A.  de.     Le  colloque  de  Poissy.     Paris.     1889. 
Sage,  Bp  J.     Works.     Spottiswoode  Soc.     Edinburgh.     1844-G. 
Schaff,  P.     History  of  the  Creeds  of  Christendom.     London.     1877. 
Shaw,  W.  A.     Elizabethan  Presbyterianisra.     Eng.  Hist.  Rev.  in,  655. 
Simpson,  R.     Edmund  Campion.     London.     189G. 
[Simpson, R.  (?)].    Parpaglia's  Mission  to  Elizabeth.    North  British  Review.    London. 

(1870.)     Vol.  ui,  p.  366. 
Stephen,  W.     History  of  the  Scottish  Church.     Edinburgh.     1894-6. 
Swainson,  C.  A.     In  the  Advertisements  of  1566  was  order  taken,  etc.?    Cambridge. 

1880. 

An  Essay  on  the  History  of  Article  XXIX.     Cambridge.     1856. 

Tomlinson,  J.  T.     The  Prayer  Book,  Articles,  and  Homilies.     London.     1897. 
Waddington,  J.     Congregational  History,  1200-1567.     London.     1869. 

Arguments  and  judgments  in  various  modern  lawsuits  :  see  Digests  to  '  The  Law 
Reports '  under  '  Ecclesiastical  Law':  especially  Sheppard  v.  Bennett  (3  A.  and 
E.  167;  4  P.  C.  371);  Ilcbbert  v.  Purchas  (3  P.  C.  605);  (Ridsdalc  v.  Clifton 
2  P.  D.  276)  ;  Read  v.  Bp  of  Lincoln  (1891  P.  9;   1892  A.  C.  644). 


NOTK 

Of  the  books  mentioned  under  this  last  head  some  may  be  considered  as  classical. 
Others  have  been  selected  out  of  avast  number  as  recent  representatives  of  the  various 
parties  and  schools  wliich  comment  on  the  religious  changes  made  in  the  period 
(1558-63)  treated  in  Chapter  XVL 


CHAPTER    XYII 

THE   SCANDINAVIAN  NORTH 
PUBLISHED    DOCUMENTS 

Aarsberetniuger   fra  det  [Danske]  K.  Geheirae-Archivet.     Edd.  C.  F.  Wegener  etc. 

Copenhagen.     1855  f. 
Aktstykker  til  Nordens  Historie  i  Grevefeidens  Tid.     Ed.  C.  Palndan-Miiller.     2  vols. 

Odense.     1852-3. 
Allen,  C.  F.     Briefe  og  Aktstykker   til   Oplysning  af   Christiern  II  og  Frederik  I's 

Historie.    i.     Copenhagen.     1854. 
Altes  und  Neues  von  Gelehrten  Sachen  aus  Dannemark.     3  vols.     Copenhagen  and 

Leipzig.     1768. 
Andersson,  A.     Skrifter  f ran  Reformationstiden.     (Skrifter  utgifna  af  Svenska  Lit- 

eratursallskapet.)     Upsala.     1889  f. 
Bang,  A.  C.     Den  Norske  Kirkes  syrabolske  Boger.     Christiania.     1889. 
Brask,  J.     Epistolae.     (Handlingar  rorande  Sveriges  Historia  xiii-xvm.)    Stockholm. 

1861  f. 
Bugenhagen,  J.    Briefswechsel.     Ed.  O.  Vogt.     Stettin.     1888. 
linllariuni  Romano-Sueo-Gothicum.     Ed.  Magnus  a  Celse.     Stockholm.     1782. 
Christiern  II's  Arkiv.     Handlingar  rorande  Severin  Norby.     Ed.  N.  J.  Ekdalil.     4  vols. 

Stockholm.     1835-42. 
Danische  Bibliothek  (ed.  Herbo  Langebek  and  Moeller).     Vols.  i-ix.     Copenhagen  and 

Leipzig.     1738-43. 
Danske   Magazin.     6   vols.     Copenhagen.     1745-52. — Nye  Danske  Magazin.     6  vols. 

1794-1836. —  Danske  Magazin.    Ser.  iii.    6  vols.    1843-60.  — Ditto.    Ser.  iv.    1861  f. 
Danske  Samlinger.     Ed.  C.  Bruun  etc.     Series  I,  vols.  i-vi.     1865-71 ;    ditto,  Series  II. 

Copenhagen.     1871  f. 
Diplomatarium  Dalecarlicum.     Ed.  C.  G.  Kroningssvard  and  J.  Liden.     4  vols.     Stock- 
holm.    1842-53. 
Eliae,  Paul.     Danske  Skrifter.     Ed.  C.  G.  Secher.     Copenhagen.     1855. 

Historiske  Optegnelsesbog.     Ed.  A.  Heise.     2  parts.     1890-1. 

Chronicon  Skibyense.     Scriptores  rerum  Danicarum.     i.     Ed.  Roerdam. 

Fant,  E.  M.     Acta  et  litterae  ad  historiam  Reformationis  in  Snecia.     Upsala.     1807. 
Fryxell,    A.      Handlingar  rorande  Sveriges   Historia,   ur  Utrikes   Arkiver.      9   vols. 

Stockholm.     1836-43. 

Gustaf  I's  Registratur.  (Handlingar  rorande  Sveriges  Historia.)  Ed.  by  I.  I.  Nord- 
strom.    10  vols.     Stockholm.     1861-87. 

Handlingar  rorande  Skandinaviens  Historia.     Stockholm.     1816  f.     Fassim. 

Hildebrand,  E.     Svenska  Riksdagsakter.     Stockholm.     1887  etc. 

Historika  Handlingar.  Kongliga  Samfundet  for  Utgivande  af  Handskrifter  rorande 
Skandinaviens  Historia.     11  vols.     Stockholm.     1861-79. 

Hosius,  S.     Opera.     2  vols.     Cologne.     1584. 

814 


BibUocjmpJn/  815 


Kalkar,  C.  H.     Aktstykker   henhiircnde  til    Daiimarks    Historic   i    Ueforiuutionstide!i 

Odease.     1845. 
Krag,  N.,  and  Stcplmnius,  S.     Den  Konge  Cliristliin  Ill's  Ilistorie.     Kdd.  Suhm  and 

Gram.     2  vols,  and  suppl.     Copenhagi-n.     177<;-8-l>. 
Kyrko-Ordningar  ocli  Forslag   deriill   fore    1G8G.      i.      Ilandlingar  roraude   Sveri^"> 

Historia.     ii,  ii.     Stockliolni.     1872. 
Laurensen,  P.     Malmujljogen.     Kd.  II.  F.  Rcerdani.     Copenhagen.     18G8. 

En  stakket  Undervisning.     Ed.  II.  F.  Rcerdani.     Copenhagen.     1890. 

Lindbloin,  J.  A.     Linkopiug  Bibliotiieks  Ilandlingar.     2  vols.     Linkoping.     1703-5. 
Meddelelser  fra  det  norske  Rigsarohiv.     Christiania.     1870  etc. 

Munter,    F.     Aktstykker    vedkomniende    Kong    Christian    og    Dronning    Dorotiicas 

Kroning  af  Bngenhagcn.     Copenhagen.      18^1. 
Norske  Rigsregistranter.     Christiania.      18G1  etc. 

Ordinatio  eccle-siastica  Regnorum  Daniae.     Ed.  J.  Bugenhagen.     Copenhagen.     15;57. 
Palladius,  Peder.     Visitatsbog.     Ed.  A.  C.  L.  Ileiberg.     Copenhagen.     1807. 
Pedersen,  Chr.     Danske   Skrifter.     5    vols.     Ed.   C.   J.    Brandt  and   R.    T.    Fenger. 

Copenhagen.     1850-G. 
Petri,   Olaus.     Svenska    Kriinika.      Ed.    G.    E.   Klemming.      Stockholm.      18fiO.     [.V 

revised  version  by  his  brother  I.anrcntius  in  Scriptores  rernm   Snecicaruni.     ii. 

Upsala.     1828.] 

Postilla.     Stockholm.     1857. 

Pontoppidan,  E.     Annales  Pkclesiae  Danicae.     ii,  in.     Copenhagen.     1744-7. 

Regesta  Diplomatica  Ilistoriae  Danicae.     i.     Copenhagen.     1847. 

Rcerdam,     Holgar    F.     Monumenta    Historiae    Danicae.     Vols,    i,    it.     Copenhagen. 

1873-5. 
Sacchinns,  Juvencius  and  Cordara,  Ilistoriae  Societatis  Jesu  (for  Possevin's  reports). 

Antwerp.     1620  f. 
Samling  af  Christian  den  Tredies  Breve  til  Reformateurs  (in  Aarsberetningcr  fra 

det  K.  Geheirae-Archivet,  i).     Copenhagen.     1855. 
Schumacher,  And.     Gelehrter  Manner  Briefe  an  die  Konige  in  Diinnemark.     :5  vols. 

Copenhagen  and  Leipzig.     1758-9. 
Scriptores    Rernm    Suecicarum.      Vols,    i    and    ii.      Ed.    E.   M.    Fant  etc.      Upsala. 

1818-28.     Vol.  in.     Ed.  C.  Annerstedt.     Upsala.     1871. 
Svenska  Riksdagsakter.     Ed.  E.  Hildebrand  and  Oskar  Alin.     Stockholm.     1887  f. 
Swart,  P.     Gnstaf  I's  Kriinika.     Ed.  G.  E.  Klemming.     Stockholm.      1H70. 
Tausen,  H.     Smaaskrifter.     Ed.  II.  F.  Ra-rdam.     Copenhagen.     1870. 
Theiner,  A.     Schweden  und  seine  Stellnng  zum  heiligen  Stuhl.     2  vols.     Augsburg. 

1838-9.     Fr.  transl.  by  J.  Cohen.     Paris.     1842. 
Thyselins,  P.  E.     Ilandlingar  til  Sveriges  Kyrkohistoria  under  K.  Gustaf  I.     Orebro. 

1839-41. 
Troil,  U.  von.     Skrifter  och  Handlingar  til  Uplysning  i  Svenska  Kyrko  och  Reforma- 
tions Historien.     5  pts.     Upsala.     1790-1. 


PRINCIPAL    HISTORIES 

Alin,  O.     Sveriges  Nydaningstid  1521-l(;il.     Stockholm.     1878. 

Allen,  C.  F.     De  tre  nordiske   Rigcrs   Historic    1497-153(i.     ni,  iv,  v.     Copenhagen. 

1867-70-72. 
llaandbog    i    Fiiderlandcts    Historic.      Copenliagen.      1870.      (French    tr.     l)y 

E.  Bcauvois,  with  good  i)iitliograi)liy.     2  vols.     Copenhagen.     1878.) 
Anjou,   L.    A.      Svenska   Kyrkorcformationens    Historia.      3    vols.      Upsala.       1851. 

Eng.  tr.  by  II.  Mason.     1859. 
Bang,  A.  C.     Deu  Norske  Kirkes  Historic  i  det  sextcndc  Aarhundrcdc     Christiania 
"1901. 


816  The  Scandinavian  North 

Barfod,  F.     Danmarks  Historie  fra  1319  til  1670.     6  vols.     Copenhagen.     1885-93. 
Cornelius,  C.  A.     Svenska  Kyrkaus  Historia  efter  Keformationen.     Vol.  i.     Upsala. 

1886. 
Dalilmann,    F.    C.      Geschiclite    von    Daneraark.      iii.      Gesch.    d.    europ.    Staaten. 

Hamburg.     1843. 
Danmarks  Riges  Historie.     Vol.  m  (1481-1588).     By  A.  Heise.     Copenhagen. 
Geijer,    E.    G.      Geschichte    Schvvedens.     i,    ii.      Hamburg.      1832-4.     Eng.    tr.    by 

J.  H.  Turner.     London.     1845. 
Helveg,  L.  N.     Den  Danske  Kirkes  Historie.     5  vols.     Copenhagen.     1870. 
Jensen,    H.    N.     A.      Schleswig-Holsteinische    Kirchengeschichte.      Ed.    A.     L.     J. 

Michelsen.     iii.     Kiel.     1877. 
Keyser,  J.  11.     Den  Norske  Kirkes  Historie  under  Katholicismen.     2  vols.     Christi- 

ania.     1856-8. 
Lau,  G.  J.  T.     Geschichte  der  Reformation  in  Schleswig-Holstein.     Hamburg.     1867. 
Miinter,  F.     Kii'chengeschichte   von   Danemark  und  Norwegen.     3   vols.      Leipzig. 

1823-33. 
Paludan-MllUer,    C      De  fiJrste  Konger  af  den   Oldeuborgske  Slegt.      Copenhagen. 

1874. 
Schafer,    D.      Geschichte  von  Danemai'k.     iv.      Gesch.   d.   europ.    Staaten.     Gotha. 

1893. 
Waitz,  G.     Schleswig-Holsteins  Geschichte.     2  vols.     Gottingen.     1851. 
Weidling,  J.     Schwedische  Geschichte  ira  Zeitalter  der  Reformation.     Gotha.     1882. 


SPECIAL    TREATISES 

{Many  of  the  books  in  this  list  contain  documents  previously  unpublished) 

Baazius,  J.  sen.     Inventarium  Ecclesiae  Sueo-Gothorum.     Linkoping.     1642. 
Bang,  A.  C.     Den  Norske  Kirkes  Geistlighed  i  Reformations-aarhundredet.     Christi- 
ania.     1897  f. 

Dokumenter    og    Studier   vedrcerende  den    lutherske    Katekismus'    Historie   i 

Nordens  Kirke.     2  vols.     Christiania.     1893-9. 

Brandt,  C.  J.  Om  Lunde-Kannikeu  Christiern  Pedersen  og  hans  Skrifter.  Copen- 
hagen.    1882. 

Butler,  C.  M.     The  Reformation  in  Sweden.     New  York.     1884. 

Clauss,  C.  H.     Christian  der  Dritte.     Dessau.     1859. 

Engelstoft,  C.  T.  Reformantes  et  Catholici  tempore  quo  sacra  emeudata  sunt  in 
Dania  concertantes.     Copenhagen.     1836. 

De    Confutatione    Latina    quae    Apologiae    concionatorura    evang.    anno   1530 

traditae  apposita  est  commentatio.     Copenhagen.     1847. 

Fant,  E.  M.     De  successione  canonica  episcoporum  Sueciae.     Upsala.     1790. 

Flaux,  A.  de.     La  Sufede  an  xvi">«  si^cle.     Paris.     1861. 

Gustavus    Vasa,    the    History    of.      With    extr.    from    his    corr.      London.      1852. 

[Contains  a  short  bibliography.] 
Gerdes,  D.     Historia  Reformationis.     iii.     Groningen  and  Bremen.     1749. 
Gfrorer,  A.  F.     Gustav  Adolph.     Ed.  2.     Stuttgart.     1845. 
Gieseler,  J.  C.  L.     Lehrbuch  der  Kirchengeschichte.     in.     Bonn.     1853. 
Gramm,  J.     Dissert,  de  Reformatione  in  Dania.     In  Scriptorum  a  Societate  Hafniensi 

editorum  in.     Copenhagen.     1747. 
Ilammerich,    F.     Danmark    under    Adelsvalden,    1523-1660.      4    vols.      Copenhagen. 

1854-9. 
Ilandelmann,    H.      Die    letzten    Zeiten    der    hanseatischen    Ucberraacht    in    Norden. 

Kiel.      1853. 


Biblio(jraphij  817 


Herins,  H.  Doktor  Pomeranns,  Johannes  Bugenhagen.  8chnften  des  Vereins  fiir 
Reformationsgeschichte.     vi  22.     Halle.     1888. 

Knud.sen,  H.    Joachim  Kd'nnow.     Copenhagen.     1840. 

Konigsfeldt,  J.  P.  F.  J)e  katholske  Biskopper  i  Uanniark.  llistoriske  Aarbciger. 
Ed.  C.  Molbech.     in.     Copenhagen.     18.">l. 

Magni,  0.     Historia  de  gentibus  septentrionalibus.     Uomc.     \:>i>:>. 

[Mason,  A.  J.]  The  Loss  of  the  Succession  in  Denmark.  Cluirch  Quarterly  Review, 
XXXII.     London.     1891. 

Messenius,  J.  Scondia  lUustrata.  Ed.  J.  Peringskjold.  15  vols.  Stockholm. 
1700-5. 

Molbech,  C.     llistoriske  Aarboger.     3  vols.    Copenhagen.     1845-51. 

Miiller,  P.  E.     Vita  Lagonis  Urne.     2  pts.     Copenhagen.     18;U-o. 

Miinter,  B.  Sj'mbolae  ad  illustrandum  Bugenhagii  in  Dania  Comniorationera.  Copen- 
hagen.    1836. 

Den  Dauske  Reformationshi^torie.     2  vols.     Copenhagen.     1802. 

Nicholson,   A.     Apostolical    Succession  in  the  Church  of  Sweden.     2  pts.     London. 

1880-7. 
Nissen,  R.  T.     Den  Nordiske  Kirkes  Historic.     Christiania.     1875. 
Norlin,   T.     Svenska  Kyrkans  Historia  eftcr  Reformationcn.     2   vols.     Stockholm. 

1864-71. 
Paludan-MuUer,  C.     G ravens  Feide.    2  vols.     Copenhagen.     1853-4. 

Jens  Andersen  Beldenak.     Odense.     1837. 

Reuterdahl,  H.     Svenska  Kyrkans  Historia.     4  vols.     Lund.     1838-66. 

Romer,  R.  C.  H.     Specimen  historico-theologicum  de  Gustauo  I.     Utrecht.     1840. 

Rordam,  H.  F.     Mester  Ja-rgen  Jensen  Sadolin.     Odense.     1866. 

Schmitt,  L.     Die  Verteidigung  der  katholischen   Kirche  in  Diinemark.     Paderborn. 

1899. 

Der  Karmcliter  Paulus  Hclia.     Stimmen  aus  Maria-Laach,  No.  60.     Freiburg  i. 

B.     1893. 

Johann  Tausen.     Gorresgesellschaft.     Bonn.     1894. 

Sjogren,  O.     Gustaf  VVasa.     Stockholm.     1896  f. 

Thyselius,  P.  E.     Bidrag  till  Svenska  Kyrkans  Historia.    Upsala.     1851  etc. 

Vogt,  K.  A.  T.     Johannes  Bugenhagen  Pomeranns.     Elberfcld.     1867. 

Waitz,  G.     Liibeck  unter  J.  WuUenwever  u.  d.  Europ.  Politik.     3  vols.     Berlin.     1855. 

Watson,  P.  B.     The  Swedish  Revolution  under  Gustavus  Vasa.     Cambridge,  Mass. 

1889. 
Willson,  T.  B.     History  of  Church  and  State  in  Norway.     London.     1903. 
Yssel  de  Schepper,  G.  A.     Lotgevallen  van  Christiern  II  en  Isabella  van  Oostenrijk. 

ZwoUe.     1870. 

See  also  .Vrticles  etc.  in 

Annaler  for  nordisk  Oldkyndighed  (Copenhagen). 

Colonial  Church  Chronicle.     1861. 

Historisk  Tidsskrift  (Christiania). 

Historisk  Tidsskrift  (Copenhagen). 

Kirkehistoriske  Samlinger  and  Nye  Kirkehistoriske  Samlinger.     1847  se(i(|. 

Norske  Magazin. 

Skandinavisk  Museum  and  Skandinaviske  Litteratur-Selskabs  Skrift.-r.  Copen- 
hagen.    170S-1832. 

Thcologisk  Tidsskrift. 

Videnskabernes  Selskabs  Skrifter  og  Afhandlinger  (Copenhagen). 

Zeitschrift  fiir  historische  Theologie  xi;  xvii  (Reformation  in  Sweden);  xx 
(Reformation  in  Iceland). 

Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengeschichte.     viii,  xiii. 


62 


CHAPTEE   XVIII 


THE   CHURCH   AND  REFOEM 

Some  of  the  material  for  the  following  bibliography  loas  collected  by  Lord  Act07i,  and 
the  note  on  Manuscripts  is  in  his  oxon  words 

I.     MANUSCRIPTS 

The  archives  of  the  Council  of  Trent  are  dispersed  in  many  places.  At  the  Vatican, 
they  occupy  151  volumes.  From  these,  mainly,  the  Authentic  Acts  will  be  edited  by 
the  directors  of  the  Historische  Jahrbuch;  and  Sickel  is  preparing  to  publish  the 
Correspondence  between  Home  and  the  Legates  during  the  later  period. 

The  Farnese  papers  are  at  Naples,  the  Borromeo  papers  in  the  Ambrosian  Library; 
the  Altemps  papers  at  Sesto  Calende.  There  are  12  volumes  of  Commendone  at  Citta 
di  Castello,  and  42  volumes  of  Cervini,  the  most  valuable  of  all,  at  Florence ;  while  the 
letters  of  Cardinal  Pole  have  to  be  brought  together  from  at  least  eight  public  collec- 
tions. Beyond  the  diplomacy  of  the  Catholic  States,  the  Record  Office  contains  more 
than  is  indicated  in  tlie  Calendars. 

Most  of  Pallavicini's  sources  are  accounted  for.  Part  of  Sarpi's  are  reported  to 
have  been  lost  in  a  fire ;  but  his  chief  authority  for  the  last  years  is  preserved  in  the 
Gonzaga  Archives  at  Mantua. 

Information  as  to  manuscript  materials,  the  present  limit,  and  the  direction  of 
research,  is  given  by  some  of  the  writers  mentioned ;  by  Koellner,  Theiner,  Calenzio, 
Drufl'el,  Siclvel;  by  Finazzi,  in  the  Miscellanea  di  Storia  Italiana;  Cigogna,  Inscrizioni 
Veneziane ;  and  Valentinelli,  Regesteu  zur  Deutschen  Geschichte  aus  den  Handschriften 
der  Marcusbibliothek  (Abhandlungen  der  Historischen  Classe  der  Bayrischen  Akademie, 
1866). 

Transcripts,  made  from  time  to  time  for  learned  men,  are  preserved  at  Paris, 
Naples,  Venice,  Bergamo,  Trent,  at  the  Britisli  Museum  and  tlie  Bodleian.  Among 
these  are  the  letters  of  the  papal  agent,  Visconti,  and  the  diaries  of  the  Secretary 
Massarelli. 


II.     AUTHORITIES,   AND   COLLECTIONS   OF   DOCUMENTS,    MAINLY 
CONTEMPORARY 

Balau,  P.     Clementis  VII  Epistolae.     Monumenta  seculi  xvi  hist,  illustrantia,  vol.  i. 

Innsbruck.     1885. 
Baluze,  S.     Miscellanea,  ed.  Mansi,  iii,  iv.     4  vols.    Lucca.     1764. 

818 


Bibliography  819 


Bartholomaeus  dc  Martyribus,  F.     Opera,     ii  423-450.     Komc.     1735. 
Beccadelli,  L.     Mominienti.     Ed.  G.  Moraiidi.     2  vols.     Bolo-jiia.     1797-1804. 
Brauusberger,  O.  B.     Petri  Canisii  Epistohie  et  Acta.     Vol.  i.     1541-5G.     FrcibiirL'  U 

B.     1896. 
Bucholtz,  F.  B.  von.     Gcschichtc  Ferdinand  des  Erstcn.     9  vol.s.     Vl.nna.     18.38. 
Calenzio,  G.     Documenti  iuediti  e  nuovi  lavori  letterarii  sul  Concilio  di  Trento.     Kome. 

1874. 
Carayon,  A.     Docnments  iuedits  conceniant  la  compagnie  de  Ji-sns,    23  vol.-*.    I'oitlers. 

1863-86. 
Care,  Annibale.     Delle   Lcttere   del   Comnieudatore,    scritte   a   uorae  del  Card.   Alcs- 

sandro  Faniese.     3  vols.     Milan.     1807. 

Prose  luedite.     Ed.  G.  Cugnoni.     Imola.     1872. 

Carraciolo.  A.     Dc  vita  Pauli  IV.     Cologne.     1612. 

Castelnau,  M.  dc.     Memoires.     Ed.  Le  Labonreur.     3  vols.     Bnisscls.     1731. 

Cerasoli,  F.  Alcuni  docnnienti  inediti  relativi  al  Concilio  di  Trento.  In  Archivlo 
Storico  Italiano,  serie  5,  vol.  viii.     pp.  289-295.     Florence.     1891. 

Cimber,  M.  L.,  and  F.  Danjou.     Archives  Curicuses,  vi.     1-170.     Paris.     183.5. 

Coleccion  de  Docunientos  iueditos  para  la  Ilistoria  de  Espana,  vol.  i.\.  Madrid.  1840. 
(Doc.  relativos  al  concilio  de  Trento.) 

Commendone,  J.  F.  Lcttere.  In  Miscellanea  di  Storia  Ilaliana,  vi.  pp.  1-240. 
(Regia  Deputazion  di  Storia  Patria.)     Turin.     1809. 

Concilium  Tridentinuni.  Diarioruin.  Actoruni,  Epistularuni,  Tractatnnin  Nova  Col- 
lectio;  edidit  Societas  Goerresiana.  Diariornm  Pars  Prima.  Ilorculis  Severoli 
Comm^ntarius,  Angeli  Masscrelli  Diaria  i-iv.  Ed.  Sebastianus  ^lerkle.  Frei- 
burg i.  B.     1901. 

Conde,  Memoires  du  Prince  de.     6  vols.     1743-45.     Michaud,  vi. 

Constitutiones  Societatis  Jcsu.     Rome.     1558. 

Contarini,  G.     Opera.     Paris.     1571. 

Cortcse,  G.     Epistolarum  Familiarium  Liber.     Venice.     1573. 

Cyprianus,  E.  S.     Tabularium  Ecclesiae  Romanac,  saeculi  xvi.     Frankfort.     1731. 

Delia  Casa,  Giovanni.     Opere,  ii.     6  vols.     Naples.     1733. 

DoUinger,  J.  J.  von.  Ungedruckte  Berichte  und  Tagebiicher  zur  Geschiclitc  dcs  Con- 
cils  von  Trient.     2  vols.     Nordlingen.     1876. 

Beitrage  zur  Politischen,  Kirchlichcn,  und  Culturgeschichtc  der  scchs  Ictzten 

Jahrhunderte.     Vols,  i,  in.     Ratisbon.     1862-82. 

Druflel,  A.  von.  Beitruge  zur  Reichsgeschichtc.  In  Briefe  und  Akten  zur  Gcsch.  des 
sechzelinten  Jahrhunderts.     (Bavarian  Academy.)     4  vols.     Munich.     1873-96. 

and  K.  Brandi.     Monumcnta  Tridentina.     Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  des  Concils 

von  Trient.     Vol.  i.     1540-7.     Munich.     1899. 

Ehses,  S.  Eine  Denkschrift  aus  dcm  Jahre  1530  uber  Berufung  eines  allgemein.'n 
Conzils.     In  Romischc  Quartalschrift.     pp.  473-492.     1894. 

Fiedler,  J.  Relationen  Venetianischer  Botschaften  uber  Deutschland  und  Oesterrcich 
im  lOten  Jahrhunderte.  Fontes  Rerura  Austriacarum,  Diplom.  et  Acta^  xxx. 
Vienna.     1870. 

Friedensburg,  W.  Nuntiaturbcrichte  aus  Deutschland.  1533-9.  4  vols.  Gotha. 
1892-3. 

Giberti,  J.  M.     Opera.     Edd.  P.  and  II.  Ballorini.     Verona.     1740. 

Granvelle,  Card  de.  Papicrs  d'Etat.  Ed.  C.  Weiss,  iii-vii.  Collection  des  docu- 
ments in^dits  de  I'llistoire  de  France.     1842-9. 

Gratianus,  A.  M.  De  Scriptis  invita  Minerva,  cum  ndnotationibus  H.  Lagomarsinl. 
2  vols.     Florence.     1745-6. 

De  Vita  J.  F.  Commendoni  C.irdinalis.     Libri  iv.     Paris.     1609. 

Grisar,  II.     lacobi  Laincz  Disputationes  Tridentinae.     2  vols.     Innsbruck.     1886, 

Ilistoriac  Societatis  Jcsn  pars  i)rima  sive  Ignntius  auctorc  Nicolao  Orlnndlno.  Pars 
secnnda  sivo  Lainius.  Pars  tortia  sive  Borgia.  Pars  (piarta  sive  Evorardus 
auctorc  F.  Sacchino.  Pars  (piinta  sive  Claudius,  finus  prior  auctorc  F.  Sac- 
chino.     Pars  quinta,   tomus   posterior,   ab  anno   Clirlsli    l.V.d    ad    1016  auctorc 


820  The  Church  and  Reform 

J.  Juvencio.     Pars  sexta  complectens  res  gestas  sub  M.  Vitelleschio,  tomns  prior 
ab  anno  Cliristi  1616  anctore  J.   C.  Cordara.     Tomus  secimdus  ab  anno  Christ! 
1625  ad  annum  1632.     Antwerp  and  Rome.     1620-1750. 
Hosius,  S.     Epistolae  ad  Diversos.     In  Opera  ii.     Cologne.     1584. 

Epistolae.    2  vols.     Vols,  iv  and  ix.     In  Acta  Historica.     Edd.  F.  Hipler  and 

V.  Zakrzewski.     Cracow.     1879  and  1888. 

Hugo,  C.  L.     Sacrae  autiquitatis  Mouumenta  Historica,  Dogmatica,  Diplomatica.     i. 

215-426.     Etival.     1725. 
Imago  primi  seculi  Societatis  Jesu  a  Proviucia  Elandro-Belgica  ejusdem  Societatis 

representata.    Antwerp.     1640. 
Instructions  et  Lettres  des  Rois  trcs-chrestiens  et  de  leurs  ambassadeurs  et  autres 

Actes  conceruant  le  Concile  de  Trent.     Paris.     1654. 
Laemmer,  H.     Analecta  Roraana.     Scliafl'liausen.     1857-67. 

Monumenta  Vaticana  liistoriam  ecclesiasticam  seculi  xvi  illustrantia.     Freiburg 

i.  B.     1861. 

Le  Plat,  J.     Monumentorum  ad  Historiam  Concilii  Tridentini  potissimum  illustrandum 

spectantium  amplissima  collectio.     7  vols.     Louvain.     1781-7. 
L'Europe   Savaute,  ix  63-241.      The   Hague.      1719.     Le   Courayer's   selection  from 

Visconti's  letters  for  1562. 
Loyola,  Ignacio  de.     Cartas.     Madrid.     1874-7. 
Mallei,  G.  P.     De  vita  et  moribus  Loyolae.     Cologne  etc.     1585. 
Mausi,  J.  D.     Conciliorum  Supplementum,  v.     Venice.     1751. 

Martene,  E.,  and  Durand,  U.     Amplissima  Collectio,  viii.     1022-1445.     Paris.     1733, 
Milledonne,  A.     Journal  de  Concile  de  Trente.     Ed.  A.  Bascliet.     Paris.     1870. 
Monumenta  historica  Societatis  Jesu  nunc  primum  edita  a  Patribus  eiusdem  Societatis. 

Madrid.     1894  etc. 
Morone,   G.      Legazione.      In  Brieger's   Zeitschrift  fiir  Kirchengeschiclite,   ni  654. 

Gotha.     1879. 
Paleotto,  G.     Acta  Concilii  Tridentini,  15G2-3.     Ed.  J.  Meudham.     1842. 
Paris,  L.     Negociations,  lettres  et  pieces  diverses  relatives  au  regne  de  FraiiQois  II. 

In  Collection  de  documents  inedits  sur  I'histoire  de  France.     1841. 
Pastor,  L.     Correspondenz  Contarinis,  1541.     1880. 
Planck,  G.  J.      Anecdota  ad   Historiam   concilii  Tridentini  pertineutia.      Gottingen. 

1791-1818. 
Pogiani,  J.     Epistolae.     Ed.  H.  Lagomarsiui,  S.  J.     4  vols.     Rome.     1762-8. 
Pole,   R.     Epistolae,    et  aliorum  ad  ipsum.     Ed.    A.   M.   Quirini.     5   vols.     Brescia. 

1744-57. 
Relazioni  della  corte  di  Roma.    Ed.  T.  Gar.    i,  ii.     In  E.  Alberi,  Relaz.  degli  Amb. 

Venet.     Ser.  n.     Vols,  in  and  iv.     Florence.     1846  and  1857. 
Ribadeneyra,  P.     Vida  del  P.  Ignacio  de  Loyola.     Madrid.     1594. 

Vita  Jac.  Laynes,  Alphonsi  item  Sahneronis.     Cologne.     1604. 

Vita  Ignatii  Loiolae  qui  religionem  clericorum  societatis  Jesu  instituit.     8vo. 

Antwerp.     1587. 

Ribier,  G.     Lettres  et  Memoires  d'Estat,  ii.     Blois.     1666. 

Ruscelli,  G.     Lettere  di  Principi.     Venice.     1574. 

Sadoleto,  J.     Epistolarum  Libri  Sexdecim.     Lyons.     1560. 

Sala,  A.  Document!  circa  la  Vita  e  le  Gesta  di  San  Carlo  Borromeo.  ui.  3  vols. 
Milan.     1861. 

Santa  Croce,  Cardinal  P.  Lettres.  Ed.  J.  Aymon,  in  "  Tous  les  synodes  nationaux 
des  ^glises  r^formees  de  France  auxquels  on  a  joint  les  mandemens  roiaux  et 
plusieurs  lettres  politiques  sur  ces  mati^res  synodales."  (Cinquante  lettres  anec- 
dotes ecrites  au  Cardinal  Borromeo  par  le  Cardinal  de  St  Croix.)  The  Hague. 
1710. 

Vita  e  Nunziature,  in  Miscellanea  di  Storia  Italiana,  v.     pp.  477-1173.     (Regia 

Deputazion  di  Storia  Patria.)     Turin.     1868. 

Schelhorn,  J.  G.  Araoenitates  Historiae  Ecclesiasticae.  2  vols.  Frankfort  and  Leip- 
zig.    1737  and  1738. 


Biblhxjrapluj  821 


Serristori,  A.     Lcgazioni.     Ed.  Gins.  Cancstrlni.     Florence.     1853. 
Sickel,  Th.     Analecta  Juris  Pontillcii.     1872. 

Das  Reforiiiations-Libcll  Ferdinands  I,  in  Archiv  f(ir  osterreicliische  Geschichte, 

XLv.     (Kaiscrliche  Akadeniie  der  Wisseuschaftcn.)     Vienna.     1871. 

Die  Geschafts-ordnunj?  des  Ooncils  von  Trient.     Vienna.     1871. 

Zur  Geschichte  des  Concils  von  Trient,  1559-G3.     Vienna.     1872. 

Silva,  L.  A.  Rebello  da,  and  J.  da  Silva  Mendes  Seal.     Corpo  Diploinatico  I'ortugacz, 

vi-x.     (Acadeniia  das  Sciencias  de  Lisboa.)     18G2-91. 
Sleidan,  J.     Brief wechsel.     Ed.  H.  Bauingarten.     Strassburg.     1881. 
Tejada  y  Ramiro,  Juan.    Coleccion  de  Canones  de  la  Iglesia  Espartola,  iv.     541-886. 

5  vols.     Madrid.     1849-55. 
Theiner,  A.     Acta  genuina  Concilii  Tridentini.     2  vols.     Zagrabr.     1875. 
Truchsess,   0.     Vier  ungedruckte  Gutacliten  des  Cardinals  Otto  Truchsess  iibcr  die 

Lage  der  kath.   Kirche  in  Deutscldand.     Ed.  W.  E.  Schwarz.     liiJmischc  Quar- 

talschrift,  pp.  25-43.     1890. 

Ein  Schreiljeu  des  Cardinals  Otto  von  Augsburg  iiber  das  Koncil  von  Trient. 

Ed.  Knopfler.     Historisches  Jahrbuch,  .x.     p.  555.     Munich.     1^89. 

Litterae  a  Truchsesso  annis  15G0  et   15G1  datac  ad  llosiuni.      Kd.  A.  Weber. 

Ratisbon.     1892. 

Turba,  G.     Venetianische  Depeschen  vom  Kaiscrhofe,  ii,  iii.     Vienna.     1892-5. 
Vargas,  F.  de,  and  de  Malvenda,  P.     Lettres  et  Memoires  de.  et  de  quel()nes  Evfques 

d'Espague    touchant    le   Concilc   de   Trente.      Ed.    M.    Lcvassor.      Amsterdam. 

1699. 
Vergerio,  P.  P.     Briefwechsel.     Edd.  Kausler  und  Schott.     Bibliotek  des  Literarischen 

Vereins.    Vol.  cxxiv.     Stuttgart.     1875. 
Villanueva,  J.  L.  and  J.     Viage  Literario  a  las  Iglesias  de  Espafia,  con  algunas  obscr- 

vaciones.     Vol.  xx  (1851).     22  vols.     Madrid  and  Valencia.     1803-52. 

J.  L.     Vida  Literaria.  *  n.     409-470.     2  vols.     London.     1825. 

Vio,  Tommaso  de.  Cardinal  Cajetan.     Opuscula  Omnia.     Rome.     1570. 

Visconti,    C.       Lettres    Anecdotes,    1563.       Ed.    J.   Aymon.      2   vols.      Amsterdam. 

1719. 
Zebrzydowski,  Andreas  de  V.  (Bishop  of  Cracow).     Epistolae,  vols,  i,  ii.     lu  Acta 

Historica  res  gestas  Poloniae  illustrautia.     i.     Cracow.     1878. 


III.     PRINCIPAL   HISTORIES 

Baguenault  de  Puchesse,  F.     Ilistoire  du  Concile  de  Trente.     8vo,     Paris.     1S70. 
Becchetti,  F.  A.     Istoria  degli  ultimi  quattro  secoli  della  Chiesa,  ix,  x.     12  vols.     4to. 

Rome.     1795-6. 
Calenzio,  G.     Esarae  Critico-letterario  delle  opere  riguardanti  la  Storia  del  Concilio  dl 

Trento.     Rome  and  Turin.     18G9. 

Saggio  di  Storia  del  Concilio  di  Trento  sotto  Paolo  III.     Rome.     1869. 

EUies  Du'pin,  L.  Hist,  de  I'Eglise  du  xvi"  si6cle.  Paris.  1701-13. 
Froude,  J.  A.  Lectures  on  the  Council  of  Trent.  London.  189G. 
Janssen,  J.     Geschichte  des   Deutschen  Volkes,  vols,   in,  iv.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1876 

Laemmer,  H.     Zur  Kirchengeschichte  des  sechzehnten  und  sieljcnzeluitcn  Jahrhunderts. 

Leipzig.     18G3. 
Leva,  G.  de.     Storia  Documentata  di  Carlo  V,  vols,  iv,  v.     Venice.     1881.  18!i4. 
Maurenbrecher,  W.      Das  Concil  von  Trient.     llaumer's   Historisches   Taschcnlmch. 

Leipzig.     188G,  1888,  1890. 

Geschichte  der  katholischen  Reformation.     Niirdlingen.     1880. 

Maynier,  L.     fetudes  sur  le  Concile  de  Trente.     Paris.      1874. 

Mendham,  J.     Memoirs  of  the  Council  of  Trent.     London.     18:54-46.    A  cnpy  prrpaivd 

for  a  second  ed.  in  the  Incorporated  Law  Society's  Library. 


822  The  Church  and  Reform 

Pallavicini,  Sforza.     Istoria  del  Concilio  cli  Trento  1656.     Ed.  F.  A.  Zaccaria,  4  vols. 

Rome.     1833.     AVith  additions,  but  omitting  controversy,  3  vols.     1846. 
Philippson,  M.     La  Contre-Revolntion  religiense  du  xvie  sifecle.     Brussels.     1884. 
Westeuropa  ira  Zeitalter  von  Philipp  II,  Elizabeth  und  Heinrich  IV,  i.     71-184. 

(Onckeu,  Allgemeine  Geschichte,  etc.)     Berlin.     1882. 
Prat,  J.  M.     Histoire  du  Concile  de  Trente.     3  vols.     Brussels.     1854. 
Ranke,  L.  von.     Die  Romischen  Pabste,  i.     Berlin.     1834.     Werke,  xxxvn.     Leipzig. 

Raynaldus,  O.     Annales  Ecclesiastici  (ed.  Mansi,  xiii,  xiv,  xv).     Lucca.     1755-6. 
Salig,   C,   A.     Vollstandige    Historie    des   Tridentischen    Conciliums.      3  vols.     4to. 

Halle.'   1741-5. 
Sarpi,  Paolo.     Istoria  del  Concilio  Tridentino.     (Pietro  Soave  Polano.)     London.     1619. 

French  translation  with  notes  by  P.  Le  Courayer.     2  vols.  London,  1736,  and  3 

vols.  London,  1751. 
Ward,   A.   W.     The   Counter  Reformation.      Epochs  of  Church  History.      London. 

1889. 
Wessenberg,  I.  H.  von.     Die  grossen  Kirchenversammlungen.     iii,  iv.     Constance. 

1840. 


IV.     TREATISES   ON   SPECIAL   SUBJECTS 

Baini,  G.     Memorie  storico-critiche  della  vita  e  delle  opere  di  Giovanni  Pierluigi  da 

Palestrina.     2  vols.     Rome.     1828. 
Baumgarten,  H.     Geschichte  Karls  V.     Vol.  in.     3  vols.     Stuttgart.     1885-92. 

iiber  Sleidans  Leben  und  Briefwechsel.     Strassburg.     1878. 

Bernabei,  N.    Vita  del  Cardinale  Giovanni  Morone  vescovo  di  Modena,  e  biografie  del 

Cardinali  Modeuesi.     Modena.     1885. 
Braun,  W.     Cardinal  Gasparo  Contarini.     1903. 
Braunsberger,    0.     Entstehung  und    erste    Entwickelung  der  Katechismen  des   sel. 

Petrus  Canisius.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1893. 
Brosch,  M.     Geschichte  des  Kirchenstaates.     Gotha.     1880. 
Cantu,  C.     Gli  Eretici  d'  Italia,  discorsi  storici.     Vol.  ii.     3  vols.    Turin.     1865-67. 

Italiani  lUustri,  ii.     3  vols.     Milan.     1879. 

Carayon,  A.     Bibliographic  Historique  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus.    Paris.     1864. 
Cecchetti,  B.     La  Republica  di  Venezia  e  la  Corte  di  Roma  nei  rapporti  della  Religione, 

n.     25-66.     Venice.     1874. 
Cossio,  A.     II  Cai'dinale  Gaetano  e  la  Ri forma.     Cividale.     1902. 
Cr§tinau-Joly,  J.     Histoire  religiense  politique  et  litt^raire  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jfisus. 

6  vols.     Paris  and  Lyons.     1845-6. 
Dittrich,  F.     Gasparo  Contarini.    Braunsberg.     1883. 
Druffel,    A.   von.     Ueber  den  Vertrag   zwischen  Kaiser  und   Papst  von  Juni   1541. 

Deutsche  Zeitschr.  fiir  Gesch.  in.    Freiburg  i.  B.  and  Leipzig.     1889. 

L.  V.  Nogarola.     In  Sitzungsberichte  der  Bayr.  Akademie,  Hist.  Classe,  426-456. 

1875. 

Entgegnung  auf  Maurenbrechers  Antikritik.     In  Historische  Zeitschrift,  xvni. 

128-170.     Munich.     1867. 

Die  Sendung  des  Cardinals  Sfondrato  an  den  Hof  Karls  1547-48.     Abhandlungen 

der  Hist.  Classe  der  k.  Bayer.  Akad.  Wiss.  xx.     1893. 

Karl  V  und  die  Romische  Curie  1544-46.     Vier  Abliaudlungen  der  Bayr.  Akade- 
mie, Hist.  Classe.     1877-91. 

Duruy,  G.     Le  Cardinal  Carlo  Caraffa.     Paris.     1882. 

Eichhorn,  A.     Der  Erralandische  Bischof  und  Cardinal  S.  Hosius.     2  vols.    Konigs- 

berg.     1854-5. 
Friedensburg,  W.     Beitrage  zur  Briefwechsel  der  katholischen  Gelehrten  Deutsch- 


Bibliofjrdpliij  8215 


lands  im  Reformationszeitalter.    In  Zeitschrift  fUr  Kirchenceschlchte.  1897- 

1902. 

Gieseler,  J.  C.  L.     Lehrbuch  der  Kircheiigcschiclite,  in,  2,  pp.  505-509.     Bonn.  1853. 

Gothein,  E.     Ignatius  von  Loyola  und  die   GegLMireformation,  pp.   4C8-520.  Halle. 

Guillemin,  J.  J.    Le  Cardinal  de  Lorraine.     Paris.     1847. 

Haruack,  A.     Lehrbuch  der  Dogmengeschichte,   in.     588-017.     Berlin.     1890.     Engl. 

Trans.     Vol.  vii,  pp.  1-115.     London.     1899. 
Hefele,  C.  J.     Der  Cardinal  Xiinenes.     Tiibingen.     1851.    Trans.  London.     1800. 
Hinschius,  P.     Kirchenrecht,  iii.     430-451.     1883.     8vo.     Berlin.     18C9  etc. 
Hofl'man,  P.  E.  F.     Die  Jesuiten.     2  vols.     Mannheim.     1871. 
Huber,  J.  N.     Der  Jesuiten-Orden  nach  seiner  Verfassnug  und  Doctrin,  Wirksamkeit 

und  Geschichte  characterisirt.     Berlin.     1873. 
Jenkins,  R.  C.     Pre-Tridentine  Doctrine.     London.     1891. 

The  Judgment  of  Thomas  de  Vio.     Canterbury.     1858. 

Koellner,  W.  H.  1).  E.     Symbolik,  ii.     7-140.     Hamburg.     1844. 

Laemmer,  H.     Die  vortrideutinisch-katholische  Theologie  des  Reformationszeitalters 

aus  den  Quellen  dargestellt.     Berlin.     1858. 
Lafuente,  M.     Ilistoria  general  de  E.spafia,  vols,  xii,  xiii.     Madrid.     1853-4. 
Lavall^e,    J.      Histoire    des    Inquisitions    religieuses    d'ltalie    et    d'Espagne    et    de 

Portugal,  depuis  leur  origine  jusqu'a  la  conquete  de  I'Espagne.    2  vols.     Paris. 

1809. 
Lea,  H.  C.     A  History  of  the  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.     3  vols.     London.     1888. 

Chapters  from  the  Religious  History  of  Spain  connected  with  the  Inquisition. 

Philadelphia.     1890. 

Limborch,  P.  van.     Hist.  Inquisitionis.    Amsterdam.     1692. 

Llorente,  J.  L.      Historia  critica  de  la  Inquisicion  de  Espafia.     10   vols.     Madrid. 
1822. 

J.  A.     Anales  de  la  Inquisicion  de  Espana.     2  vols.     Madrid.     1812-13. 

Luber,  W.     Gaetano  da  Thiene.     1883. 

Maurenbrecher,  W.     Karl  V  und  die  Deutschen  Protestanten.     Diisseldorf.     1865. 
Mendham,  J.     The  Literary  Policy  of  the  Church  of  Rome.     London.     1830. 
Moses,  R.     Die  Religionsverhandhingen  in  Hagenau  und  Worms.     1889. 
Miiller,  H.     Les  Origines  de  la  Compagnie  de  J6sus,  Ignace  et  Lainez.     Paris.     1898. 
Neue  Beitrage   zur  Gesch.    des   Conzils   von   Trient.     Sybel's   Hist.   Zeitschr.     1877. 

Pt  I. 
Oehler,  G.  F.     Lehrbuch  der  Symbolik,  pp.  88-107.    Stuttgart.     1891. 
Pastor,  L.    Die  kirchlichen  Reunionsbestrebungen,  wiihrend  der  Regicrung  Karls  V. 

Freiburg  i.  B.     1879. 
Pieper,  A.     Die  Piipstlichen  Legaten  und  Nuntien  in  Deutschland   Frankreich  und 

Spanicn  seit  der  Mitte  des  sechzehnten  Jahrhundcrts.     i.     Miinster.     1897. 
Raderns,  M.     De  vita  Petri  Canisii  de  Societate  Jesu,  Sociorum  e  Germania  primi. 

Libri  tres.     Munich.     1614. 
Reimann,  E.      Zur  Geschichte  des  Concils  von  Trient.      In  Sybel's  Hist.    Zeitschr. 

XXX  24.     Munich.     1873. 

in  Forschungen   zur  Deutschen  Geschichte,   vi,   vii,    viii.     Gottingcn.     1866, 

7,  8. 

Reumont,  A.  von.     Vittoria  Colonna.     Freiburg  i.  B.     1881. 

Reusch,  F.  H.     Der  Index  der  Verbotenen  Biicher.     Bonn.     1885. 

Ritschl,  A.    Die  Christliche  Lehre  von  der  Rcchtfcrtigung  und  Versohnung.     Vol.  i. 

Geschichte  der  Lc'lire.     P.onn.     1889. 
Sala,  A.     Biografia  di  S.  Carlo  Borromeo.     Milan.     1858. 
Sclopis,  F.     Le  Cardinal  Jean  Morone,  1809.     In  Stances  et  travaux  de  rAcndtinio  des 

sciences  morales  et  politiques  (Institut  Imp6rial  de  France).     Vols.  x<-  and  xci. 

Paris.     1809-70. 
Serry,  J.  H.     Historia  Congregationum  de  auxiliis  gratiac.     Venice.     1740. 
Sickel,  Th.     Romische  Berichte,  1895-6.     In  Sitzungsbericiite  der  Phil.   Hist.  Classe 


824  The  Church  and  Reform 

cler  k.  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften.     Vienna.     Vol.  133,  1895;   vol.  135,  1896; 

vol.  141,  1899;  vol.  143.  1901;  and  vol.  144,  1902. 
Somraervogel,    C.      Bibliotheque  de   la  Compagnie  de  Jesus.      Brussels   and  Paris. 

1890  etc. 
Vetter,  J.  P.     Die  Religionsverhandlungen  auf  dem  Reichstage  zu  Regeusburg.     1899. 
Watrigant,  H.     La  Genese  des  Exercices  de  saint  Ignace  de  Loyola.     In  Etudes  pub- 

liees  par  des  pferes  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus.     May  20,  July  20,  October  20. 

Paris.     1897. 
Zur  Gescliiclite  des  Concils  von  Trient.     In  Sybel's  Hist.  Zeitschr.     1896.     No.  3. 


{See  also  Bihliography  to  Chapter 


XIL) 


CHAPTER    XIX 

TENDENCIES    OF     EUROPEAN    THOUGHT    IN    THE 
AGE   OF   THE    REFOKMATION 

"      I.    ORIGINAL   AUTIIOKITIES 

Acta  et  scripta  Synodalia  Dordracena.  .  .  .  Erdcrvik.  1C20.  [This  book  was  so 
hastily  printed  that  the  text  is  often  confused  and  incorrect;  certain  copies 
were  issued  without  any  date  on  the  title  page.  It  is  the  Remonstrant  version 
of  the  Synod's  proceedings.] 

ActaSynodi  nationalis  .  .  .  auctoritate  .  .  .  foederati  Belgii  provinciaruin.  .  .  .  Dordrecht. 
1G20.     [The  ofticial  and  authoritative  documents  of  the  l{efornied  Church.] 

Arminius,  J.     Opera  theologica.     Leyden.     1(!29. 

The     Works    of.      Transl.     Ijy    James    Nichols.      2    vols.      London.      1825-8. 

Vol.  III.     Transl.  by  William  Nichols,  the  son.     London.     1875. 

Bacon,  Francis.     For   what  he   calls   the    "  philosophia   pa.storalis"   of  Telesio,  see 

De  principiis  atque  origiuibus.      Gruter's  eil.,  1G53,  pp.  208  ff.      Spalding's  cd. 

1859,  vol.  in,  pp.  G5  ft'.     Eng.  transl.  vol.  v,  pp.  4(3(5  ft". 
Bellarmine,  Card.     Disputationes  de  Controversiis  Christianae  Fidel  adversus   hujus 

Teraporis    Haereticos.      Ingolstadt.      1587-90.      In   Opera  Omnia.      Vols.    i-iv. 

Cologne.     1617. 
Boehme,  Jacob.     Theosophische  Schriften.     9  vols.     Amsterdam.     1C82.     Die  Werke 

Boehmes.     Ed.  Schiebler.     6  vols.     Leipzig.     1831-4G. 
Bruno,  Giordano.     Opere  raccolte  e  pubblicate  da  Adolfo  Wagner.    2  vols.     Leipzig. 

1830. 

Opera  Latina.     2  vols.     Naples.     1879. 

Scripta  Latina  (Gfriirer).     Stuttgart.     1836. 

Cheranitius,  D.  M.     Examcn  concilii  Tridentini.  .  .  .     Geneva.     IGtl. 

Episcopius,  Simon.     Opera  theologica.     2  vols.     Amsterdam.     IGoO,  1665. 

Epistolae  Clarorum  Virorum  .  .  .  ad  Joaiinem  Reuchlin.     ]'>H. 

Epistolae  Obscurorum  Virorum.  Ft  I,  3rd  ed.  1516,  with  41  opi.stles  and  7  In 
the  appendix. —  Ft  II,  1517,  with  62  epistles,  8  being  added  In  an  appendix 
to  a  second  ed.  Finally  in  an  ed.  publ.  1556  a  late  Ep.  was  added,  which 
Bocking  describes  as  "  rustice  obscena." 

Erasmus,  Desidcrius.     Oi)era.     8  vols.     Basel.     1510.      10  vols.      Loydcii.      1703-6. 

Novum  Instrumenlum.     Basel.     1516. 

Ficino,  ISIarsilio.     De  Religione  Christiima  et  Fidel  IMetato.     Florence.     1478. 

Theologia  Flatonica  de  Animorum  Immortalltatc.     Florence.     1482. 

Opera.      Paris.      1641.      The   edition    of   his    Translations.    Venice.    1517,    also 

contains  in  the  dedications  and    the   prefaces   matter   whleli   Is   ImporUnt   for 

his   views. 
Gemistos  Flethon.     De  virtutibus.     Rasel.     1552. 
De  Flatonicac  atcjuc  Aristotelicae  I'hilosophlac  difl'erentia.     Itascl.     1574. 


826  Tendencies  of  European  ThougJit  in  the  Reformation  Age 

Gomarus,  Frauciscus.     Opera  theologica  omnia.     Amsterdam.     1664. 
Grotius,  Hugo.     Opera  omnia  tlieologica.     4  vols.     Amsterdam.     1679. 
Hutten,  Ulricli  von.     Opera  omnia.     Bocking.     5  vols.     With  two  supplementary  vols. 
Leipzig.     1859-69. 

Die  Deutschen  Schriften.     Ed.  J.  Szamatolski.     1891. 

Gesprache  .  .  .  iibersetzt  .  .  .  von  D.  F.  Strauss.     Leipzig.     1860. 

Montaigne,  M.  de.     Essais.     1580-8. 

Pico  della  Mirandola.     Pici  utriusque  Opera.     "Vol.  i.     Basel.     1573.     Vol.  ii.     1601. 

[The  two  Picos  are  the  uncle  and  nephew,  John  and  John  Francis.] 
Pomponazzi,  P.     De  animae  iramortalitate.     Leyden.     1534. 

De  Incantationibus.     Basel.     1556. 

De  Fato,  libero  Arbitrio,  etc.     Basel.     1567. 

Opera.    Basel.     1567. 

Rabelais,  Francois.     Hlppocratis  et  Galeni  libri  aliquot.    Lyons.     1532. 

CEuvres  de  Rabelais  avec  les   Remarques  de  Le  Duchat  et  de  La  Monnoye. 

5  vols.     Amsterdam.     1711. 

(Euvres  de  Rabelais,  ed.  variorum  .  .  .  avec  un  commentaire  historique  et  philo- 

logique,  par  Esmangart  et  E.  Johanneau.     8  vols.     1823. 

The  whole  woi-ks  of  .  .  .  ,  Or  the  Lives,  Heroic  Deeds  and  Sayings  of  Gargantua 

and  Pantagruel.  Done  out  of  French  by  Sir  Thomas  Urchard,  Knight,  M.  Mot- 
teux  and  others.     2  vols.     London.     1708. 

Reuchlin,  J.     De  verbo  miriflco.     Basel.     1494. 

De    rudiraentis     hebraicis.     1506.      Of     the    three     books     i    and    ii    were 

a  lexicon,  in  a  grammar;  published  first  at  Pforzheim,  later  at  Basel  at  the 
author's  own  cost.  [The  publisher  lamented  that  the  book  had  no  sale.]  An 
enlarged  edition  under  supervision  of  Sebastian  Munster  appeared  at  Basel, 
1537. 

De  arte  predicandi.     1508. 

De  arte  cabbalistica.     1516. 

Servetus,  M.     De  Trinitatis  Erroribus.     Libri  vii.     1531. 

Christiauismi  Restitutio.  .  .  .     1553. 

Socinus,  F.     De  Jesu  Christo  Servatore.     1594. 

De   sacrae  scripturae   Auctoritate.      Assertiones  theologicae  de  trino  et  uno 

Deo.  De  statu  primi  hominis  ante  lapsura.  Tractatus  de  ecclesia.  Tractatus 
de  justiflcatioue.  These  treatises  were  published  in  a  volume  of  Opuscula, 
printed  at  Cracow,  1611. 

Opera  Omnia.     In  vols,  i  and  ii  of  Bibliotheca  Fratrum  Polonorum.     1656. 

Telesio,  B.     De  rerum  natui-a  juxta  propria  principia.     Naples.     1586.     This  is  the 

date  of  the  completed  Avork;  books  i  and  ii  were  published  in  1565  at  Rome. 
Valla,  Laurentius.     In  latiuam  N.T.  interpretationem  ex  coUatione  graecor.  exem pla- 
num   adnotationes.      (Ed.    Erasmus.)      1505.      [The    work    was    dedicated    to 
Christopher  Fischer  the  apostolical  protonotary.] 

Declamatio  de  falso  credita  et  ementita  Constantini   M.  donatione,  cum  ipsa 

hac  donatione.  Written  1440.  Cf.  Hutteni  Opera  i,  pp.  18  fl".  English  trans- 
lation with  Hutten's  preface  about  1534.  French  translation,  with  historical 
dissertation,  1879. 

Elegantiarum    Lat.    Ling.      Paris.      1471.      [This    work    has    been   frequently 

republished :  in  the  15th  century  alone,  no  fewer  than  12  editions  appeared.] 

De  Voluptate  ac  Vero  Bono,  with  its  continuation  or  appendix  "  De  libero 

Arbitrio."     1483. 

Opera.     Basel.     1540-3.     [The  edition  however  is  not  quite  complete.] 

Zanchius,  H.     Omnia  opera  theologica.    3  vols.     Geneva.     1619. 


Bibliojruphij  827 


II.     BIOGRAPHIES   OF   REPRESENTATIVE   THINKERS 

Adamsou,  R.     Giordano  Bruno.     In  The  Development  of  Modern  Philosophy,  vol.  ii. 

Edinburgh.     1903. 
Baird,  II.  M.     Theodore  Beza.     New  York.     1899. 
Baum,  J.   W.     Theodor  Beza,  nach  haudschriftlichen  Quellcn  dargcstcllt.     Leipzig. 

I8-I0-52. 
Berti,   D.     Giordano  Bruno,   sua  vita  c  sua  dottrina.     Turin.     18C8.     New   edition, 

1880. 
Christie,  R.  C.     ^tienne  Dolet,  the  Martyr  of  the  Renaissance.     London.     1880.     New 

edition,  revised  and  corrected,  1899. 
Doueu,  0.     Clement  Marot  et  le  Psaultier  Huguenot.     2  vols.     Paris.     1878-9. 
Drummoud,  R.  B.     Erasmus,  his  Life  aud  Character  as  sliewn  in  his  Correspondence 

and  Worlds.     2  vols.     London.     1873. 
Fiorentino,  F.     Bernardino  Telesio.     2  vols.    Florence.     1872. 

Pietro  Pompanazzi.     Florence.     18G8. 

Firth,  I.     Life  of  Giordano  Bruno.     London.     1887. 

Geiger,  L.     Johanu  Reuchlin;    sein  Leben  und  seine  Werke.     Leipzig.     1871.     (See 

also  Geiger's  edition  of  Reuchlin's  Briefwechsel.     Tubingen.     1875.) 
Jortin,  J.     Life  of  Erasmus.     2  vols.     London.     1758-00. 
Levi,  D.     Giordano  Bruuo,  o  La  Religione  del  Pensiero.     Turin.     1887. 
Mclntyre,  J.  L.     Giordano  Bruno.     London.     1903. 
Mayerhoflf.     Johann  Reuchlin.     Berlin.     1830. 
Monrad,  G.  (Bishop  of  Lolland  and  Falster).    L.  Valla.     Die  erste  Kontroverse  iibcr 

d.  Urspruug  d.  apostol.  Glaubeusbekenntnisses.     Transl.   from  the  Danish   Ijy 

A.  Michelseu.     Gotha.     1881. 
Schlosser,  F.  C.     Theodor  de  Beza  und  Peter  Martyr  Vermigli.     Heidelberg.     1809. 
Strauss,  D.  F.     Ulrich  von  Ilutten.     Bonn.     1877. 
Tocco,  F.     Le  Opere  Latine  di  Giordano  Bruno  exposte  e  confrontate  con  Ic  Italianc. 

Florence.     1889.     See  also  :  Le  Opere  Inedite  di  G.  B.     Naples.     1891. 
Wolf,  M.  von.     Lorenzo  Valla.     Sein  Leben  und  seine  Werke.    Leipzig.     1893. 


III.     HERESIES 

Annhaptists 

Bax,  E.  Belfort.     Rise  and  fall  of  the  Anabaptists.     London.     1903. 
Blaupot  ten  Gate,  S.     Geschiedenis  der  Doopgezinden.     Leeuwarden.     1839-47. 
Bouterwek,  C.  W.     Zur  Litteratur  und  Geschichte  der  Wiedertaufer.     Bonn.     1864. 
Cornelius,    C.    A.      Geschichte    dcs    Munsterischen     Aufruhrs.      2    vols.      Leipzig. 
1850-60. 

Historische  Arbeiten,  Essays  11  and  in.     Leipzig.     1899. 

Erkbara,  H.  W.     Geschichte  der  protest.  Sekten  im  Zeitalter  der  Reform.     Hamburg. 

Geschichtsbucher  der  Wiedertaufer  in  Oestreich-Ungarn.    Ed.  by  Dr  J.  Beck.    Vienna. 

1883. 
Heberle,  Th.     St.  und  Kr.     1851,  pp.  121-194;  1855,  pp.  817-890. 
History  of  Anabaptists  of  Iligli  and  Low  Germany.     (Anon.)     1042. 
Keller,  Ludwig.     Gesciiichte  der  Wiedertaufer.     Munstcr.     1880. 
Loserth,  J.     Wiedertaufer  in  Mahren.     Arcliiv   fiir  Oesterr.  Gesciiichte.     Vol.  i.xxxi, 

pp.  135  K.     Vienna.     1894. 

Balthasar  Hubmayer.     Brunn.     1893. 

Die    Stadt    Waklshut    und   die  Oesterreich.    Kogierung    1523-6.     (Archiv   lur 

Oesterr.  Geschichte.     Vol.  lx.\vii,  p.  1.)     Vienna.     1891. 


828  Tendencies  of  European  Thought  in  the  Reformation  Age 

Menno,  Simons.     Werke.     Ainsterflam.     1581. 
Ottii  Annales  anabapt.     Basel.     1672. 

Seidemann,  J.  C.     Thomas  Miinzer.     Dresden  and  Leipzig.     1842. 
Sweetser  Buvvage.     The  anabaptists  of  the  16th  century.     Papers  of  Amer.  Soc.  of 
Ch.  Hist.     m. 

Socinians 

Fock,  O.     Der  Sociuiauismus.     Kiel.     1847. 

Krasinski,  Count  V.  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Rise,  Progress,  and  Decline  of  the 
Reformation  in  Poland.     Engl,  transl.     2  vols.     London.     1838. 

Rees,  T.     The  Racoviau  catechism.  .  .  .     London.     1818. 

Tollin,  H.  Das  Lehrsystem  Michael  Servets  genetisch  dargestellt.  Giitersloh. 
1876-78.  (Tollin  has  most  exhaustively  discussed  Servetus  and  almost  every 
question  connected  with  him.  His  articles  extending  over  many  years  are  to  be 
found  in  many  German  historical  and  theological  reviews  and  periodicals; 
notably  in  the  St.  u.  Kr.  Zeitschr.  fur  Wissensch.  Theologie,  and  the  Jahrb.  fur 
Protestant.  Theologie.) 

Willis,  R.     Servetus  and  Calvin.  .  .  .    London.     1877. 


Miscellaneous 

Arnold,  G.     Kirchen  und  Ketzer-Historie.     4  vols.     Frankfort  am  Main.     1699. 
Cantii,  C.     Gli  Eretici  d'  Italia.     3  vols.     Turin.     1865-7. 

Harnack,  A.      Dogmengeschichte.      Vol.    3.      Third   Book.      1890.      Translation  by 
W.  McGilchrist.    Vol.  vii.     London.     1899. 


IV.     GENERAL 

Baur,  F.  C.     Die  christliche  Lehre  von  der  Di-eieinigkeit  und  Menschwerdung  Gottes. 

3rd  vol.     Tubingen.     1843. 
Buhle,  J.  G.     Geschichte  der  neuern  Philosophic.     Gottingen.     1800. 
Bruckerus,  Jacobus.     Historia  critica  philosophiae.     4  vols.     Leipzig.     1743. 
Carriere,  M.     Die  philosophische  Weltanschauung  der  Reformationszeit.     Stuttgart. 

1847. 
Dollinger,  J.  J.  von.     Die  Reformation.  ...     3  vols.     Regensburg.     1851. 
Hegel,  G.  W.  F.     Geschichte  der  Philosophic.     3  vols.     Berlin.     1836. 
Hoffding,  H.     History  of  modern  pliilosoph}'.     Vol.  i.     London.     1900. 
Lavallee,  J.     Histoire  des  Inquisitions  Religieuses.     2  vols.     Paris.     1808. 
Llorente,  J.  A.     Historia  critica  de  la  Inquisicion  de  Espaiia.     Madrid.    Translated  by 

A.  Pellier.     2nd  ed.     1818.     Histoire  Critique  de  I'lnquisition  d'Espagne.     4  vols. 

Paris.     1818. 
McCrie,  T.    History  of  the  Reformation  in  Italy.     Edinburgh.     1827.     New  ed.     1856. 
Philippson,  M.     La  Contre-RSvolution  Religieuse  au  xvi  Siecle.     Brussels.     1884. 
Ritter,  H.     Gescliichte  der  christlichen  Philosophic.     Hamburg.     1850. 

Die  christliche  Philosopliie.  .  .  .     Gottingen.     1859. 

Schultze,  F.     Geschichte  der  Philosophic  der  Renaissance.     Jena.     1874. 

Tozer,  H.  F.     A  Byzantine  Reformer.     Journal  of  Hellenic  Studies,  1886,  pp.  353-380. 

Zeller,  E.     Geschichte  der  deutschen  Philosophic.     Munich.     1875. 

{See  also  the  Bibliographies  to  Chapters  XVI  and  X  VII  of  Vol.  /.) 


CHRONOLOGICAL   TABLE 

OF 

LEADING   EVENTS 

1503  Death  of  Alexander  VI.     Accession  of  Julius  II. 

1508  Luther  goes  to  Wittenberg. 

1509  Accession  of  Henry  VIII  in  England. 

1511  Synod  of  Pisa. 

1512  Opening  of  the  Fifth  Lateran  Council. 

1513  Death  of  Julius  11.     Accession  of  Giovanni  de'  Medici  as  Leo  X. 
Accession  of  Christian  II  in  Denmark,  Norway,  and  Sweden. 

1515  Death  of  Louis  XII  of  France.     Accession  of  Francis  I. 

Battle  of  Marignano  (September  13). 

1516  French  Concordat  with  Leo  X. 

Death  of  Ferdinand  of  Aragon. 

Treaty  of  Noyon. 

1517  Close  of  the  Fifth  Lateran  Council. 

Charles  V  goes  to  Spain. 

Publication  of  Luther's  Theses  (November). 

1518  Luther  before  the  Cardinal-Legate  at  Augsburg. 

Zwingli,  people's  priest  at  Zurich. 

1519  Death  of  the  Emperor  Maximilian  (Januaiy  19). 

Election  of  Charles  to  the  Empire  (June). 

1520  Luther  excommunicated. 

Publication  of  Luther's  Appeal  to  the  Christian  Nobilitij. 

Charles  V  in  England  (May).     Field  of  Cloth  of  Gold  (June). 

Coronation  of  Charles  V  at  Aachen  (October). 

Christian  crowned  King  of  Sweden  (November). 

The  Stockholm  Bath  of  Blood. 

Straits  of  Magellan  passed. 

1521  Rising  of  Gustaf  Eriksson  (Gustavus  Vasa)  in  Dalecarlia. 

Defeat  of  the  Comuneros  at  Villalar  (April  24). 

Diet  of  Worms.     Luther  placed  under  the  Ban  of  the  Empire. 

Treaty  of  Bruges  (August).     Albany  in  Scotland. 

Outbreak  of  war.     Occupation  of   Milan  by   tlic  forces  <>f  Cliarlcs  and   Tioo 

(November). 

Death  of  Leo  X  (December  1). 

1522  Election  of  Adrian  Dedel  as  Adrian  VI. 

Luther  returns  to  Wittenberg. 

Battle  of  the  Bicocca  (April). 

Charles  V  in  England.     Treaty  of  Windsor  (June). 

820 


830  Chronological  Table 

1522  Charles  V  in  Spain. 

The  Knights'  War  in  Germany. 

Conquest  of  Mexico  completed. 

Capitulation  of  Rhodes  to  the  Turks  (December). 

1523  First  public  disputation  at  Zurich. 

Flight  of  Christian  II  from  Denmark. 

Rule  of  Frederick  I  (of  Holstein)  in  Denmark  and  Norway. 

Gustavus  Vasa  King  in  Sweden. 

Defection  of  the  Constable  of  Bourbon. 

Bonn i vet  in  Italy. 

Suffolk  and  van  Buren  in  Picardy. 

Death  of  Adrian  VI  (September  14). 

Election  of  Giulio  de'  Medici  as  Clement  VII. 

1524  Retreat  of  Bonnivet. 

Albany  leaves  Scotland  for  the  last  time. 

Beginnings  of  the  Peasants'  Rising  in  Germany  (June). 

Invasion  of  France.     Siege  of  Marseilles. 

— '  -  Francis  crosses  the  Alps. 

— -  Foundation  of  the  Theatine  Order. 

1525  Battle  of  Pavia  (February  24). 
■  Treaties  of  the  Moor  (August). 

Conspiracy  of  Girolamo  Morone. 

Prussia  becomes  a  secular  duchy. 

1526  Treaty  of  IMadrid  (January). 

Marriage  of  Charles  V  with  Isabella  of  Portugal. 

League  of  Cognac  (May). 

Diet  and  Recess  of  Speier. 

Battle  of  Mobiles  (August). 

Raid  of  the  Colonna  on  Rome  (September) . 

Ferdinand  elected  King  of  Bohemia  and  of  Hungary. 

The  Reformation  begins  in  Denmark. 

1527  Alliance  of  Henry  VIII  and  Francis  I. 

Sack  of  Rome  (May  6). 

Diet  of  Vesteriis  in  Sweden.     Vesteras  Recess. 

Invasion  of  Italy  by  Lautrec. 

1528  France  and  England  declare  war  on  the  Emperor  (January). 

Siege  of  Naples  by  Lautrec. 

Defection  of  Andrea  Doria. 

Campeggio  in  England. 

1529  Diet  of  Speier.     The  "  Protest." 

Execution  of  Berquin. 

Civil  War  in  Switzerland.     First  Peace  of  Kappel. 

Treaty  of  Barcelona  (June  29). 

Charles  V  in  Italy. 

Peace  of  Cambray  (August  5). 

Siege  of  Vienna  by  the  Turks. 

Conference  of  Marburg. 

Fall  of  Wolsey. 

1530  Conference  at  Bologna  (Charles  V  and  Clement  VII). 

Last  imperial  coronation  by  the  Pope. 

Charles  V  in  Germany.     Diet  of  Augsburg.     Confession  of  Augsburg. 

Capture  of  Florence  (August). 


Chronological  Table  831 

1530  Revolt  against  the  Bishop  at  Geneva. 

Death  of  Margaret  of  Savoy  (December). 

1531  Ferdinand  elected  King  of  the  Romans. 

Maria  of  Hungary  Regent  of  tlie  Netherlands. 

Henry  VIII  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  in  England. 

Marriage  of  Catharine  de'  Medici  with  Henry  of  France  (October). 

Battle  of  Kappel  and  death  of  Zwingli  (October). 

League  of  Schmalkalden. 

1532  Inqui.sition  first  established  at  Lisbon. 

Annates  abolished  in  England. 

Alliance  of  France  and  England. 

Turkish  invasion  repelled. 

Religious  Peace  of  Niimberg  (July). 

Charles  in  Italy. 

Second  Conference  at  Bologna  (December). 

Conquest  of  Peini. 

1533  English  Act  in  restraint  of  Appeals  to  Rome. 

WuUenwever  Burgomaster  of  Liibeck. 

Marriage  of  Henry  VIII  and  Anne  Boleyn  (May). 

Catholic  League  of  Halle. 

Address  of  Cop.     Flight  of  Calvin. 

Death  of  Frederick  I  of  Denmark.     Disputed  succession. 

1534  Anabaptist  rising  at  Miinster. 

Duke  Ulrich  recovers  Wiirttemberg. 

Peace  of  Cadan  (June). 

The  Grafenfehde. 

Foundation  of  the  Society  of  Jesus  by  Ignatius  Loyola. 

Death  of  Clement  VII  (September). 

Accession  of  Alessandro  Farnese  as  Paul  III. 

The  Placards  at  Paris. 

English  Act  against  Papal  Dispensations,  &c. 

1535  English  Act  of  Supremacy. 

I'vxpedition  of  Tunis. 

Charles  V  in  Sicily  and  Naples. 

Death  of  Francesco  Sforza  (November). 

1536  First  Helvetic  Confession. 

Treaty  of  Francis  with  Solyman. 

Third  War  between  Francis  I  and  Charles  V.      Savoy  occupied  by  the  French 

(March). 

Calvin  at  Ferrara. 

Publication  of  the  Christianae  Religionis  Institutio. 

Wittenberg  Concord. 

Calvin  at  Geneva. 

Invasion  of  Provence  by  Charles  V. 

Smaller  monasteries  dissolved  in  England.     The  Ten  Articles. 

Christian  III  established  on  the  throne  of  Denmark  ami  Norway. 

1537  Murder  of  Alessandro  de'  Medici.     Succession  of  Co.simo  I  in  Florence. 

Consilium  (li'lcctorum  Cardinalium  de  emendanda  Ecclesia. 

1538  Calvin  expelled  from  Geneva. 

Truce  of  Nice  between  Charles  V  and  Francis  I  (June). 

Catholic  League  of  Niimberg  (June). 

Death  of  Charles  of  Gelders. 


832  Chronological  Table 

1539  Kevolt  of  Ghent. 

William  succeeds  to  Cleves-Jiilich. 

Joachim  II  of  Brandenburg  becomes  a  Protestant. 

Death  of  Duke  George  of  Saxony. 

Monasteries  suppressed  in  England.    Act  of  the  Six  Articles. 

1540  Marriage  and  divorce  of  Anne  of  Cleves. 

Venice  makes  peace  with  the  Turks. 

Reduction  of  Ghent  (February). 

Investiture  of  Philip  with  Milan. 

Edict  of  Foutainebleau. 

Death  of  John  Zapolya. 

The  Jesuit  order  approved  by  Paul  III. 

1541  Religious  Colloquy  of  Ratisbon. 

Solyman  takes  Buda  (September). 

Expedition  against  Algiers  (October). 

Calvin  returns  to  Geneva. 

1542  Fourth  War  between  Charles  and  Francis  I. 

John  Frederick  of  Saxony  and  Philip  of  Hesse  overrun  Brunswick. 

Death  of  James  V  of  Scotland  (December). 

The  Inquisition  established  at  Rome. 

1543  Barbarossa  in  the  Western  Mediten-anean. 

Expedition  of  Charles  against  the  Duke  of  Cleves. 

Conquest  of  Gelders. 

1544  Diet  of  Speier. 

Battle  of  Ceresole  (April). 

Sieges  of  Boulogne  and  St  Dizier. 

Peace  of  Cr^py  (September). 

1545  Massacre  of  the  Waldenses  of  Provence  (April). 

Opening  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (December). 

1546  Death  of  Luther  (February). 

Peace  between  France  and  England. 

Diet  of  Ratisbon. 

Alliance  of  Charles  V  with  Maurice  of  Saxony. 

League  of  Charles  V  with  Paul  III. 

The  Schmalkaldic  War. 

Execution  of  the  Fourteen  of  Meaux. 

1547  Death  of  Henry  VIII  (January).     Accession  of  Edward  VI. 

Somerset  Protector. 

Death  of  Francis  I  (March).     Accession  of  Henry  II. 

The  Council  removes  from  Trent  to  Bologna  (March). 

Battle  of  Miihlberg  (April).     Maurice  Elector  of  Saxony. 

Murder  of  Pierluigi  Farnese  (September). 

Diet  of  Augsburg  (September). 

Battle  of  Pinkie. 

Establishment  of  La  Chamhre  Ardente. 

Inquisition  finally  established  at  Lisbon. 

1548  Betrothal  of  Mary  Stewart  to  the  Dauphin  Francis. 

The  Augsburg /Hienm  proclaimed  (May). 

First  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI. 

1549  Consensus  Tirjurinus. 

War  between  England  and  France. 

■ Battle  of  Dussindale. 


ChroKoloii'ical  Table  833 


1549  Fall  of  Somerset.     Rule  of  Warwick  (Northumberland)  in  England. 

Council  of  Bologna  suspended. 

Death  of  Paul  III. 

1550  lilpction  of  Giovanni  Maria  del  Monte  as  Julius  III. 

Peace  between  England  and  France.     Boulogne  restored  to  France. 

Maurice  of  Saxony  undertakes  to  execute  the  ban  against  Magdeburg. 

1551  War  in  the  Parmesan. 

The  Council  reopened  at  Trent. 

Capture  of  Tripoli  by  the  Turks. 

•  War  in  Savoy  (September). 

Capitulation  of  Magdeburg  (November). 

1552  Treaty  of  Chambord  (January). 

Second  Act  of  Uniformity  and  Second  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

Invasion  of  Lorraine  by  France  (March).     Occupation  of  the  three  bishoprics. 

Flight  of  Charles  V  before  Maurice  of  Saxony  (May). 

Suspension  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Conference  at  Passau.     Treaty  of  Passau. 

Siege  of  .Metz  (October — December). 

1553  League  of  Heidelberg. 

Capture  of  Terouanne  (June). 

Battle  of  Siever.shausen  (July).    Death  of  Maurice  of  Saxony. 

Death  of  Edward  \'I  of  England  (July).     Lady  Jane  Grey  proclaimed. 

Accession  of  Mary  Tudor. 

1554  Rising  of  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt. 

Expulsion  of  Albrecht  Alcibiades  from  Germany. 

Marriage  of  Philip  of  Spain  and  Mary  Tudor  (July). 

1555  Diet  of  Augsburg.     Religious  Peace  of  Augsburg  (September). 

Death  of  Julius  III  (March).     Giovanni  Pietro  Caraffa  elected  as  Paul  IV. 

Fall  of  Siena  (April). 

Abdication  of  Charles  V  at  Brussels. 

1556  Truce  of  Vaucelles. 

AVar  between  Paul  IV,  supported  by  France,  and  Philip  II,  in  Italy. 

The  Due  de  Guise  in  Italy  (December). 

1557  England  declares  war  on  France. 

'Battle  of  St  Quentin  (August). 

Paul  IV  makes  peace  with  Philip  II  (September). 

1558  Capture  of  Calais  (January). 

Marriage  of  Mary  Stewart  and  the  Dauphin  Francis. 

Laynez  elected  General  of  the  Jesuit  Order. 

Battle  of  Gravelines  (July). 

Death  of  Mary  Tudor  (November).     Accession  of  Elizabeth. 

1559  Death  of  Christian  III  of  Denmark  (January). 

Acts  of  Supremacy  and  Uniformity  in  England. 

Treaty  of  Cateau-Cambr^sis  (April). 

John  Knox  in  Scotland.     The  Lords  of  the  Congregation  in  arms. 

Protestant  Synod  at  Pari.s. 

Death  of  Henry  II  of  France  (July).     Accession  of  Francis  II. 

Death  of  Paul  IV  (August). 

Election  of  Giovanni  Angelo  de'  Medici  a.s  Pius  IV. 

1560  Death  of  Gustavus  Vasa  of  Sweden. 

Tumult  of  Amboise  (February  — March). 

Michel  de  I'Hdpital  Chancellor  of  France. 

r    \r.  TT.  II.  *" 


^^4  Chronological  Table 


1560  Edict  of  Romorantin  (May). 

Treaty  of  Edmourgh  (July). 

Reforming  Parliament  at  Edinburgh  (August). 

Arrest  of  Conde  (October). 

Death  of  Francis  II  of  France.     Accession  of  Charles  IX 

French  Estates  at  Orleans. 

1561  French  Estates  at  Pontoise. 

Mary  Stewart  in  Scotland  (August). 

Colloquy  of  Poissy  (September). 

1562  The  Council  reopens  at  Trent. 

Opening  of  the  Religious  Wars  in  France. 

Treaty  of  Hampton  Court  (September). 

1563  The  Thirty-nine  Articles. 

Close  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

1564  Bull  Benedictiis  Deus. 

Death  of  Calvin  (May), 


INDEX 


Aachen,  Charles  V  crowned  at,  42 

Aalborg,  fall  of  (1534),  615 

Academy,  the  Modenese,  386  sq. 

Act  of  the  Six  Articles,  the  (1539),  450, 466  sq., 

477 
Acta  Auf/ustana,  the,  by  Martin  Luther,  133 
Acts  of  Succession  (1534),  442;  (1536),  445 
Acts  of  Supremacy    (1534),  442;   (1559),  567 

sqq. 
Adelmann  (German  reformer),  138 
Adrian    IV,    Pope    (Nicholas    Breakspeare), 

601 
Adrian  VI,  Pope  (Adrian  of  Utrecht),  19-21, 

27,  32,  44,  47,  147,  169  sq.,  378,  400,  418,  623, 

641 
Adriano  di  Corneto,  see  Castellesi,  Cardinal 
Adriano,  Mateo,  402 
Aegidius  of  Viterbo,  8,  30,  32 
Aegineta,  Petrus,  16 
Aeneas  Sylvius,  see  Pius  II,  Pope 
Agrarian  legislation,  English,  469,  497 
Agrarian    revolution,    the,   in    England,    489 

sqq. 
Agricola,  Johann,  201,  264 
Agricola,  Michael,  629 
Agricola.  Stephen,  207 
Aides,  in  France,  96 

Aigues-Mortes,  interview  of  (1538),  73,  98 
Ailly,  Pierre  de,  281 
Albany,  John,  Duke  of,  50,  419  sq.,  422  sq., 

426,  453 
Alber,  Matthaus,  of  Reutlingen,  160,  332 
Albert    I,    Duke    of    Mecklenburg,    King    of 

Sweden,  (iOO  sq. 
Albert!,  Leo  Battista,  702 
Albrecht  II,  King  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia, 

198 
Albrecht    of    Brandenburg,     Archbishop    of 

Mainz,  121,  163,  195,  238,  251 
Albret,  Henri  de,  43 
Albret,  Jeanne  de,  75 
Alcabala,  the,  in  Spain,  99 
Alcahi,  Alfonso  de,  400 
Alcala,  University  of,  400 
Alciati,  Andrea,  352 
Alciati,  Giovanni  Paolo,  393 
Aleander,  Girolamo,  Cardinal,  139,  141,  240, 

379,  383 
Alencon,  Duke  of,  51 


Alesius  (Alexander  Aless),  555 
Alexander  IV,  Pope  (Rinaldo  Conti),  114 
Alexander  VI,  Pope  (Rodrigo  Borgia),  death 

of,  1  sq. ;  400 
Alexander  of  Aphrodisia,  702 
Alexander  of  Hales,  124,  125 
Algiers,  pirates  of,  68  sq.,  75  sq. 
Allen,  John,  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  442 
AUstedt,  Thomas  Miinzer's  teaching  at,  186 
Altemps,  Marc  de.  Bishop  of  Constance,  676 
Altieri,  Baldassare,  .383 
Alva,  Duke  of,  76,  91  sq.,  409,  545  sqq. 
Ambleteuse  (Newhaven),  493 
Amboise,  tumult  of  (l.ltK)),  297 
Amicable  Grant,  the,  42.') 
Amiens,  treaties  of  (1.727),  428 
Amio,  Domenico  de,  his  statue  of  Pope  Leo  X, 

13 
Amsdorf,  Nicholas,  117,  201,  242 
Anabaptists,  the,  166,  715;  in  the  Netherlands, 

103;  doctrines  of,  222  sq. :   their  reign  and 

suppression  at  Miinster,  222,  226  sq. ;    the 

Swiss,  319,  323 
Ancrum  Moor,  battle  of  (1515),  480 
Andelot,  Francois  de,  294  sq. 
Andrea,  Fra,  of  Ferrara,  380 
Andreae,   Laurentius   (Lars  Andersson),  624, 

628 
Andrelini,  Fausto,  9 
Angouleme,  Charles,  Duke  of,  70 
Angrogne   (Piedmont),  conference  of   (1532), 

289 
Angus,  Archibald  Douglas,  Earl  of,  453  sq., 

560 
Anhalt-Kothen,  Wolfgang,  Prince  of,  19(J,  205, 

215 
Anjou,  Duke  of,  his  projected  marriage  with 

Queen  Elizabeth,  .525 
Anne  of  Beaujeu,  37,  46 
Anne  of  Cleves,  Queen  of  Henry  VIII,  237,  2o!J, 

450  sq. 
Annebaut,  Admiral,  78,  97,  460 
Anti-eraswhtas,  the,  in  Spain,  401 
Antonino  of  San  Marco,  Archbishop  of  Flor- 
ence, 3 
Aportanus,  sec  Dare 
Aquinas,  St  Thomas,  125,  127 
Arande,  Michel  d',  282,  284 
Architecture,  under  Pope  Leo  X,  13 


835 


836 


Index 


Arcimboldo,  Giovanni  Angelo,  Archbishop  of 
Milan,  006 

Arellano,  Cristobal  de,  406 

Areseu,  Jou,  Bishop  of  Holum,  621 

Aretino,  Cristoforo,  16 

Aretino,  Pietro,  17,  28 

Arezzo,  Gentile  di,  16 

Argyll,  Archibald  Campbell,  Earl  of,  558 

Argyropoulos,  Johannes,  16 

Ariosto,  Ludovico,  his  Orlando,  19 

Aristotelians,  the  new,  702 

Aristotle,  701  sq. 

Arminians,  the,  717 

Arminius,  Jacobus  (Jakob  Herman),  717 

Army,  French,  reform  of  the,  96;  Henry 
VIIFs,  473 

Arnold  of  Brescia,  311 

Arran,  James  Hamilton,  Earl  of:  see  Chatel- 
herault 

Arret  de  Merindol,  the,  289 

Arsilli,  Francesco,  15 

Art,  under  Pope  Julius  II,  5  sqq. ;  under  Pope 
Leo  X,  12-14;  decadence  of,  28 

Articles  of  Religion,  the  Forty-two,  508;  the 
Thirty-nine,  587  sq. ;  the  Marburg,  209 

Artois,  72  sq.,  76,  102 

Arundel,  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
464 

Arundel,  Henry  Fitz-Alan,  Earl  of,  497  sqq., 
525 

Ascham,  Roger,  275 

Asel,  Anton,  408 

Aske,  Robert,  468;  his  rebellion  (1536),  446  sq. 

Askew,  Anne,  466  sq. 

Assens,  battle  of  (1535),  615 

Attrition,  doctrine  of,  in  later  Middle  Ages, 
126 ;  and  Contrition,  distinction  between,  126 

Audeley,  Thomas,  Lord  Chancellor  of  Eng- 
land, 438 

Augsburg,  Diets  of  (1518),  133;  (1525),  191, 
196;  (1530),  211,  213;  (1547),  84,  262;  (1555), 
276;  Luther  at,  133;  Confession  of,  211,  617, 
632;  Recess  of  (1530),  214;  (1555),  277;  In- 
terim (1548) ,  264  sq. ;  Religious  Peace  of 
(1555),  89,  277 

Augustiniaus,  the,  and  the  religious  revival, 
106,  161 

Austria,  persecution  of  Lutherans  in,  202; 
duchy  of,  150;  policy  of,  towards  Switzer- 
land, 329 

Autos-de-f€,  at  Seville  and  Valladolid,  404, 
407  sq. 

Avalos,  Costanza  de,  Duchess  of  Amalfi,  390 

Aventinus,  Bavarian  historian,  202 

Aversa,  Giovanni  Bernardino  di,  391 

Avila,  Juan  de,  409 


Bacon,  Sir  Francis,  691,  706 
Bacon,  Sir  Nicholas,  565,  568 
Baden,  Philip,  Margrave  of,  191 
Baden,   Disputation  of   (1526), 

(1528),  329 
Bader,  Augustin,  224 


326;    Diet  of 


Badia,  Tommaso,  379 

Baduel,  Claude,  292 

Baena, Isabel  de,  406  sq. 

Baglione,  Giarapaolo,  lord  of  Perugia,  14 

Balbini,  Niccolo,  387 

Balbo,  Cesare,  35 

Balbo,  Lorenzo,  400 

Bale,  John,  19 

Baltic  Sea,  struggle  for  commercial  supremacy 
of,  228  sq. 

Ban  of  the  Empire,  pronounced  against  Martin 
Luther,  141 

Barbaresques,  the,  expeditions  against,  68  sq., 
75  sq. 

Barbarossa,  Horush,  68 

Barbarossa  II  (Kbair  Eddiu),  68-72,  75-77,  390 

Barbesieux  (French  commander),  59 

Barcelona,  treaty  of  (1529),  25,  203 

Barlow,  William,  571 

Barnabites,  Order  of,  648 

Barnes,  Dr.  Robert,  451 

Baron,  Pierre,  597 

Barton,  Elizabeth  (the  Nun  of  Canterbury), 
441 

Basel,  328;  Evangelic  Diet  of  (1530),  335;  Cal- 
vin and  Erasmus  at,  355 

Bassi,  Matteo  de',  647 

Bath  of  Blood,  the  Stockholm  {Stockholms 
Blodhad),  604 

Bathory,  Stephen,  638 

Bavaria,  papal  concessions  to,  169;  persecu- 
tion of  Lutherans  in,  202 

Bavaria,  William,  Duke  of,  221,  224,  264 

Bayard,  Chevalier,  43;  death  of,  48 

Bayham,  riot  at  (1525),  434 

Beaune,  Jacques  de  (of  Semblan^ay),  95 

Bebel,  Heiurich,  152 

Beccatello,  Lodovico,  398 

Beckenried,  Catholic  League  of  (1524),  325 

Becket,  St  Thomas,  shrine  of,  outraged,  449 

Beda,  Noel,  285 

Bedford,  Francis  Russell,  Earl  of,  495,  499, 
567 

Bedingfield,  Sir  Henry,  514,  529 

Beldenak  (Jens  Andersen),  Bishop  of  Odense, 
603  sqq.,  613 

Belgrade,  capture  of,  by  the  Turks  (1521), 
151 

Bellay,  Guillaume  du,  284-9 

Bellay,  Jean  du,  281,  284,  287 

Beuibo,  Cardinal  Pietro,  16,  30,  118,  379 

Benedictines,  the,  and  the  religious  revival, 
10(> ;  reform  of  the,  647 

Benedictus  Deus,  the  Bull  (1564),  686 

Benrjicio  della  morte  di  Crista,  the,  389 

Benivieni,  Girolamo,  702 

Bergen,  spoliation  of  the  Church  at,  618 

Berger  (Archbishop  of  Lund),  603  sqq. 

Berlichingen.  Gotz  von,  182,  187,  189 

Bern,  32.5,  328;  disputation  of  (1528),  327 

Bernardo  di  Dovizi,  see  Bibbiena 

Berni,  Francesco,  395 

Beroaldo,  Filippo  (the  younger),  15,  16 


Index 


837 


Beroaldus,  Filippo,  8,  16 

Berquin,  Louis  (ie,  283  sq.,  34fi 

Berthelier,  Philibert,  3(52 

BerthoM,  Archbishop  of  Mainz,  131,  133,  142, 

149,  158 
Berwick,  treaty  of  (1560),  576 
Bessarion,  Cardinal,  4 
Beton,  David,  Cardinal  and  Archbishop  of  St 

Andrews,  449,  456  sq. ;  murder  of,  461  sq., 

555  sq. 
Beton,    James,   Archbishop  of    St  Andrews, 

453 
Beuckelssen    (Bockelsohn) ,  Jan,   see   Jan   of 

Lej'den 
Beza,  Theodore,  284,  293-303,  350  sqq.,   363, 

373,  711,  717,  718 
Bihbiena,  Bernardo,  8,  15,  16. 
Bible,  versions  of  the:   German,  by  Luther, 

164;  French,  by  Lefevre  d'Etaples,  283  sq., 

and    by    Jean    de    Rely,   283;    Italian,    by 

Brucioli,   383;    Authorised    English   (1536), 

453,  464;    various  English,  464-^;    Spanish, 

411;  Danish,  617;  Swedish,  624  sq. 
Biblia  Hebraica,  Sebastian  Munster's,  355 
Bicocca,  battle  of  the,  45 
Biel,  Gabriel,  111 
Biez,  Marshall  du,  460 
Bigod,  Sir  Francis,  447 
Bilde,  Eske  (the  Kirkebryder),  618 
Bilde,  Ove  (Danish  Bishop),  616 
Bill,  William,  Dean  of  Westminster,  565 
Billicanus,  German  reformer,  160 
Billick,  Eberhard,  251 
Bishops'  Book,  the,  448 
Blandrata,  Giorgio,  393,  637 
Blarer,  Ambrose,  101,  216,  234,  265,  328 
"  Blood  of  Hailes,"  the,  448 
Bobadilla,  Nicholas,  652  sqq. 
Boblingen,  battle  of  (1525),  189 
Bocher,  Joan,  .501,  538 
Bodenstein,  Andrew,  of  Carlstadt,  117 
Boehme,  Jakob,  690,  714  sq. 
Bogbinder  (Hans  Metzenheim),  604 
Bogislav  X,  Duke  of  Poiuerania,  170 
Bohemia  ami  Hungary,  197-9 
Bohemian  Brethren,  the,  160,  6.35  sq. 
Boleyn,    Anne,    Queen    of    Henry    VHI,    67, 

429  sqq.,  439  sq. :  beheaded,  445 
Bologna,  84,  86,  143;  Concordat  of  (1516),  32, 

281;    conferences  of   (1529),  60;    (15.32),  67; 

Council    of    (1547),    81,    260,    669;    protest 

against,  263  sq. 
Bolsec,  Jerome  Hermes,  375,  717 
Bombasius,  :308 

Bonaventura,  Giovanni,  125,  127 
Bonfadio,  Jacopo,  390 
Boniface  VIH,  Pope  (Benedetto  Gaetani),  31, 

127 
Bonivard,  Fran9oi8  de,  Abbot  of  St  Victor, 

362 
Bonner,    Edmund,    Bishop    of    London,  440, 

484  sqq.,  497,  501,  521,  533,  586 
Bonnivet,  Admiral  G.  G.  de.  44,  47,  48,  1>7 


Book  of  Common  Prayer,  the  First  (1549), 
484  sq.,  508;  the  Second  (1552  and  1559). 
508,  5()9,  591 

Book  of  Discipline,  Knox's  (15()0),  .593 

Book  of  Martyrs,  Foxe's,  538. 

Books,  bull  concerning  printing  and  publish- 
ing of,  31 ;  Indexes  of  Prohibited,  676, 
(586  sq. 

Bordesholm,  treaty  of  (1522),  607 

Borgia,  Cesare,  1 

Borgia,  Rodrigo,  see  Alexander  VI,  Pope 

Borromean  League,  the,  341 

Borromeo,  St  Carlo,  Archbishop  of  Milan,  341, 
(559,  678  sqq. 

Bothniensis,  Nicolaus,  632 

Bothwell,  Jame.s  Hepburn,  Earl  of,  575 

Botticella,  Alessandro,  16 

Bouillon,  94 

Boulogne,  British  .siege  and  capture  of  (1544), 
78,  459;  French  siege  of,  460;  restored  to 
France,  86,  499 

Boulogneberg,  493 

Bourbon,  Antoine  de  (titular  King  of  Navarre), 
295,  297  sqq.,  303,  567 

Bourbon,  duchy  of,  its  history,  46 

Bourbon,  Duke  of.  Constable  of  France,  46-55, 
97,  421,  423 

Bourdaloue,  Louis,  373 

Bourg,  Anne  du,  execution  of,  296 

Bourg,  Antoine  du,  286,  296 

Bouvines,  89,  94 

Bowes,  Sir  Robert,  446,  455 

Boxall,  John,  501 

Brabant,  76 

Bradford,  John,  161,  521,  538,  540 

Bramante,  D'Urbino  D.  L.,  5,  14 

Brandenburg,  237  sq.;  Albrecht,  Margrave 
of,  162,  169,  611,  635;  Casimir,  Margrave 
of,  169,  188,  191;  George,  Margrave  of, 
191,  205,  215,  221;  John,  Margrave  of,  2;«; 
Joachim  I,  Elector  of,  170,  195  sqq.,  215, 
220,  2.37;  Joachim  II,  Elector  of,  237-64, 
251,  276 

Brandenburg-Culmbach,  Albert  Alcibiades, 
Margrave  of,  87,  252  .sq..  270-5 

Brandenburg-Ciistrin,  Hans,  Margrave  of,  251, 
253,  264,  270  sq. 

Braiidolini,  Raffaelle,  17 

Brandon,  Charles,  .see  Suffolk,  Duke  of 

Brant,  Sebastian,  his  Ship  of  Fools,  280 

Brask,  Johan,  Bishop  of  Linka'ping,  622-7 

Breismann,  John,  161 

Brenz.  Jolin,  KiO,  207,  2<)5,  714 

Breslau,  161 

Bressc,  94 

Breviary,  Cardinal  Quignon's,  484 

Briconuet,  Guillaume,  282 

Brinon,  President  of  Rouen,  423  sqq. 

Brion,  Philippe  de,  97 

Brissac,  Fran<;ois  de,  86 

Bromley,  Sir  Thomas,  475 

Brucioli.  Antonio,  379;  his  Italian  translation 
of  the  Bible,  383 


838 


Index 


Bruges,  treaty  of  (1521),  43,  418 

BruD,  Rudolf,  312 

Brunfels,  Otto,  161 

Brunnen  League,  the  (1315),  305 

Bruno,  Giordano,  707-10 

Brunswick,  attack  on  (1542),  243;    Eric  and 

Henry,    Dukes   of,    58,   220,   235,   243,   251, 

259 
Bruuswick-Calenberg,  Eric,  Duke  of,  232,  251, 

253 
Brunswick-Grubenbagen,     Philip,    Duke    of, 

195 
Brunswick-Harburg,  Otto,  Duke  of,  270 
Bruuswick-Liineburg,  Otto,  Ernest,  and  Fran- 
cis, Dukes  of,  195,  205,  215  sq. 
Brunswick- Wolfeubiittel,  Henry,  Duke  of,  195, 

261,  275 
Brussels,  Charles  Vs  ceremony  of  abdication 

at,  90 
Bvydges.  vSir  John,  520 
Brynkelow,  490 
Bucer,   Martin.    155    sqq.,   207-65,    285    sqq., 

328  sqq.,  403,  477,  502  sq.,  508 
Buchanan,  George,  414,  555 
Buckingham,  Edward  Stafford,  Duke  of,  exe- 
cution of,  417 
Buda,  capture  of  (1541),  242 
Bade,  Guillaume,  287,  351,  710 
Bugeuhagen,  Jakob,  in  Denmark,  616,  620 
Bugenhageu,  Johann,  160,  162,  201,  231,  243, 

250 
Bnllinger,  Henry.  234, 309, 339  sq.,  355,  597  sq., 

716 
Bundschvh,  the,  175 
Biiuzli,  Gregory,  307 

Buonagrazia,  Girolamo  di  Bartolommeo,  381 
Buonavita,  Pietro,  383 
Buren,  Count  van,  45,  47,  78,  256,  422 
Burgess,  Mark,  414 
Burghley,  William  Cecil,  Lord,  504  sq.,  507, 

517,  564  sqq . 
Burgo,  Nicliolas  del,  435 
Burgundian  Circle,  the,  102 
Burgundy,  John,  Duke  of.  36 
Burgundy,  62 ;  duchy  of,  cession  of  by  France, 

51 ;  and  the  Netherlands,  102 
Burlamacchi,  Francesco,  81 

Cadan,  peace  of  (1534),  221,  232 

Caistor,  rising  at  (l."-36),  446 

Cajetan,  Cardinal  (Tommaso  de  Vio),  16,  20, 

30,  132,  138,  641 
Calagnani,  Celio,  384 
Calais,  treaty   of  (1520),  417;    conference   of 

(1521),  418;    French   capture  of    (1558),  93, 

54S,  561,  566 
Calvi  (Minicio),  Francesco,  380 
Calvin,  Ge'rard,  349  sq.,  352 
Calvin,  John,  216,  285,  294-8,  340,  393,  573  sq., 

592  sq.,   690;     and   the   Reformed   Church, 

chap,  xi,  passim ;  his  De  dementia,  352  sq. ; 

his   Christianae   Relif/ioni.s  Institutio,  287, 

356  sqq.,  363,  376;  his  Letter  to  Francis  I, 


356 ;  his  connexion  with  Geneva,  358, 363-74 ; 
his  Ordonnances  Ecclesiasttques,  370  sqq. ; 
his  system  of  education,  372  sq. ;  some  spe- 
cial services  of,  376;  at  Ferrara,  385;  his 
controversy  with  Serveto,  411;  philosophi- 
cal ideas  of,  713  sqq. 

Calvinism,  in  Scotland,  558,  573  sqq. 

Camaldolese  Congregation,  reform  of  the,  647 

Cambray,  89,  102;  peace  of  (1529),  25,  59  sq., 
203,  432 

Cambridge,  proclamation  of  Queen  Mary  at, 
517 ;  University  of,  468,  503 

Camera  della  Segnatura,  the,  pictures  of,  7 

Camerino,  reduction  of  (1539),  75 

Campagna,  Spanish  occupation  of  the,  91 

Campauella,  Tommaso,  707 

Campe,  peace  of  (1546),  461 

Campeggio,  Lorenzo,  Cardinal,  16, 171  sq.,  210, 
430 

Campeggio,  Thomas,  Bishop  of  Feltre,  665 

Cauisius,  Peter,  250,  682,  688 

Cano,  Melchior,  408  sqq.,  647,  659 

Canossa,  Ludovico  di,  16 

Canterbury,  Convocations  of  (1559),  566; 
(1563),  587  .sq. 

Cantons,  the  Swiss  Catholic,  325 

Capisucchi,  Auditor  of  the  Rota,  434 

Capito,  Wolfgang,  160,  211,  328,  335,  355 

Cappella,  Galeazzo,  16 

Capua,  Pietrantonio  di.  Archbishop  of  Otranto, 
390 

Capuchins,  the,  647 

Caraccioli,  papal  Nuncio,  139 

Caracciolo,  Antonio,  389,  396 

Caracciolo,  Galeazzo,  387,  390 

Caraffa,  Carlo,  Cardinal,  91 

Caraffa,  Giovanni  Pietro,  see  Paul  IV,  Pope 

Carew,  Sir  Nicholas,  449 

Carew,  Sir  Peter,  526 

Cariuthia,  150 

Carlstadt,  A.  Bodenstein,  138,  165  sqq.,  177, 
190,  323.  332,  606 

Carmel,  Gaspard,  295 

Carne,  Sir  Edward,  436  sq.,  564 

Carnesecchi,  Pietro,  396  sq. 

Carniola,  150 

Caroli,  Peter,  368 

Carpi,  Cardinal,  656 

Carranza,  Bartolome'  de.  Archbishop  of  Toledo, 
377,  404,  409  sq. 

Carthusians,  the,  442 

Cartwright,  Thomas,  594 

Casa,  Giovanni  della,  384 

Casaubon, Isaac,  718 

Caserta,  Gian  Francesco  di,  391 

Cassillis,  Gilbert  Kennedy,  Earl  of,  456 

Castellesi,  Cardinal  (Adriano  di  Corneto),  5, 
15 

Castellio,  Sebastian,  375,  716 

Castelnau,  Jacques  de  la  Motlie,  Baron  de, 
297 

Castelvetro,  Lodovico,  386  sq.;  Giammaria, 
387 


Index 


839 


Castiglione,  Baldassare,  8,  20 

Castro,  Alfonso  de,  402 

Catariiio,  Ambrogio,  386 

Cateau-Cambre'sis,  treaty  of  (1559),  88,  93  sq., 
566 

Catechism,  Martin  Luther's,  201,  613;  of 
Canisius,  682 

Catharine  of  Aragon,  Queen  of  England,  26, 
70,  416  sq.,  428  sqq.,  437  sqq.,  444 

Catharine  of  Austria,  marries  King  John  III 
of  Portugal,  172 

Catholic  Reaction,  in  Germany,  195-205 

Catholic  reformers,  the,  in  Italy,  397  sqq.; 
see  also  chap,  xviii,  passim 

Catholic  party,  defeat  of,  in  England  (1550), 
498 

Caturce,  Jean  de,  291 

Cavour,  Camillo,  35 

Cazalla,  Agustin,  404,  407  sq. 

Cazalla,  Francisco,  408 

Cazalla,  Pedro,  408 

Cecil,  Sir  William,  see  Burghley,  Lord 

Celibacy  of  the  clergy,  683 

Ceresole,  battle  of  (1544),  77 

Ceri,  Renzo  da,  49,  55 

Cesarini,  Alessandro,  16 

Cesi,  Paolo  Emilio,  16 

Chalcondylas,  Demetrius,  16 

Cliambord,  treaty  of  (1552) ,  87,  271 

Chamhre  Ardente,  the,  293 

Champagne,  87 

Chantries  Bill,  the  (1547),  482 

Chantry  lands,  confiscation  of,  in  England, 
502  sq. 

Charitable  system  in  the  Middle  Ages,  108 

Charlemont,  89,  102 

Charles  III,  Duke  of  Savoy,  70 

Charles  V,  Emperor  (Charles  I,  King  of 
Spain),  23-5;  his  struggle  with  Francis  I, 
chaps.  II,  III;  and  the  Reformation  in 
Germany,  chaps,  v-viii,  passim;  his  char- 
acter, 38  sq. ;  his  election,  40  sq. ;  close 
of  his  career,  89  sq. ;  416-19,  424,  429, 
449,  4,59,  492,  505,  516,  518,  534  sqq., 
660  sqq. 

Charles  VIII  (Karl  Knudson),  King  of  Sweden 
and  Norway,  600 

Charles  IX,  King  of  France,  299  sqq.,  373 

Charles  IX,  King  of  Sweden,  6:30,  032  sq. 

Chateaubriand,  Edict  of  (1551),  293 

Chateaubriand,  Madame  de,  97 

Chatelherault,  James  Hamilton  (Earl  of 
Arran),  Duke  of,  4.56 sqq.,  555-9,  574  sq. 

Chatillon,  Cardinal  de.  Bishop  of  Beauvais, 

mo 

Cheke,  Sir  John,  518 

Chemin,  Nicolas  du,  352 

Chemnitz,  Martin,  714 

Chevau-I^f/ers,  in  France,  96 

Chieregati,  Francesco,  papal  Nuncio,  32,  170 

Chievres,  see  Croy 

Chigi,  Agostino,  io,  14,  17 

Cholmeley,  Sir  Roger,  518 


Christ  Church,  Oxford,  434 

Christian  I,  King  of  Denmark,  Norway,  and 
Sweden,  GOO  sq. 

Christian  II,  King  of  Denmark,  Norway,  and 
Sweden,  144,  i69,  203,  228  sq. ;  and  the 
Reformation  in  Denmark,  602-8,  614 

Christian  III  (Duke  of  Schleswig),  King  of 
Denmark,  77,  220,  229  sqq.,  250,  444,  611, 
614-17,  619 

Christian  Art,  7,  34 

Christian  Civic  League,  the,  in  Switzerland, 
329 

Christian  Union,  the,  in  Switzerland,  329  sq. 

Christianae  Religionis  InstiUitio,  by  John 
Calvin,  287  sq.,  356  sqq.,  363,  376 

Christina  of  Denmark,  Duchess  of  Milan 
(niece  of  Emperor  Charles  V),  69,  70,  87 

Church  and  State,  relations  of,  147;  in 
France,  95;  in  Spain,  99;  in  the  Nether- 
lands, 103;  in  Geneva,  360;  in  Scotland, 
595;  Calvin's  idea  of,  3(i9  sq. ;  Lutheran, 
194  sq. 

Church,  the  Catholic,  early  ideas  of  reform- 
ation of,  2 ;  demand  for  reform  in ,  29 ;  and 
Reform,  chap,  xviii,  passim;  condition  of, 
in  France,  280  sq. ;  in  Scotland,  554;  royal 
authority  in,  in  France,  95,  Spain,  99,  and 
in  the  Netherlands,  103 

Church,  the  Reformed,  and  Calvin,  chap. 
XI,  passim ;  the  univ-ersal  and  the  local, 
Calvin's  idea  of,  369;  development  of  the 
Lutheran,  200;  Protestant  Churches  in 
France,  293  sq. 

Church  of  England,  479,  482,  591;  desire  for 
unifoi-mity  of  worship  in,  483;  and  the 
Puritans,  597 ;  of  Scotland,  591 

Church  property,  secularisation  and  spolia- 
tion of,  in  England,  195, 502  sq. ;  in  Norway, 
618 

Cibo,  Caterina,  392  sq. 

Cibo,  Giulio,  84 

Cisneros,  Dom  Garcia  de,  657 

Cisneros,  Herrezuelo  de,  407  sq. 

Cisneros,  Leonor  de,  408 

Cisneros,  Ximenes  de :  see  Ximenes,  Cardinal 

Cistercians,  reform  of  the,  in  Spain,  399 

Civita,  Vecchia,  56 

Civitella,  siege  of  (1.557),  91 

Clarenbach,  Adolf,  202 

Clement  VII,  Pope  (Giulio  de'  Medici),  4-20, 
28,  48-56,  67,  69,  171  sq.,  197,  203,  219,  322, 
414,  423  sqq.,  440,  610,  642;  his  pontificate, 
21-7 

Clement  VIII,  Pope  (Ippolito  Aldobrandini), 
687  sq. 

Clergy,  reform  of  the  Spanish,  399  sq. ;  Sub- 
mission of  the,  in  England  (1532),  4.".S; 
marriage  of,  645 ;  residence  of,  677  sq. ; 
celibacy  of,  683 

Cleves,  war  with  (154.3\  77:  John,  Duke  of, 
75,  2.36;  William,  Duke  of,  75,  77,  236,  239, 
243  sqq.,  4.50 

Cochlaeus,  Johann,  168.  212,  251 


840 


Index 


Codure,  Jean,  652  sqq. 

Cognac,  League  of  (1526),  24,  52,  427 

Coinage,    debasement    of    English,    470;    of 

Swedish,  622 
Cole,  Dr  Henry,  501,  568 
Coleridge,  Samuel  Taylor,  710 
Coligny,  Gaspard  de,  92,  295,  298,  303 
Colleges,  founded  by  Cardinal  Wolsey,  434 
Collegium  Germanicum,  the,  655 
Collegium  Romanum,  the,  655 
Colocci,  Angelo,  15 
Colonna,  Cardinal  Pompeo,  21,  57 
Colonna,  Prospero,  44,  45,  48 
Colonna,   Vittoria,   Marchioness  of   Pescara, 

33  sq.,  390,  393,  398 
Colonna,  the,  attack  Rome,  53  sq.,  55  sq. 
Commendone,  Gian  Francesco,  519,  637,  681 
Commercial  revolution,   effects  of  the,   152; 

supremacy  of  the  Baltic  Sea,  227  sq. 
Commonwealth's  men,  the,  490 
Communion,  Order  for  (1548),  482 
Complutensian  Polyglott,  the,  400 
Compostella,  pilgrimages  to,  105 
Concordat,  the,  of  Bologna  (1516),  32,  281 
Conde,  Louis  I,  Prince  of,  295,  298  sq. 
Condivi,  Ascanio,  34 
Confession  of  Augsburg,  211;  Confutation  of 

the,  212  sq. 
Confraternities,  religious,   in   Germany,  108, 

122 
Congregation  of  Jesus  Christ,   the,  558,  573 

sqq. 
Connan,  Francois,  351 
Consensus    Tigui-inus,   the,    by    Calvin    and 

Bullinger,  340 
Consilium  de  emendanda  Ecclesia,  the  (1537) 

33,  379,  643 
Consilium  . . .  super  Reformatione  sanctae  Ro- 

manae  Ecclesiae,  the  (1537),  644 
Consistory,  Calvin's,  374  sq. 
Consolidation,  territorial,   in  Europe  at  be- 
ginning of  sixteenth  century,  36  sq. 
Constance,  205,  328;    Council  of  (1414),  107, 

128 
Constantino,  see  La  Fuente 
Contarini,  Francesco,  23,  381 
Couiarini,  Gasparo,  Cardinal,  33,  379,  393,  398, 

641-4,  660 
Contrition  and  Attrition,  distinction  between, 

126 
Convention,  Lutheran,  at  Naumburg  (1555), 

276 
Convocations     of     Canterbury     (1559),     566; 

(1563),  587  sq. 
Cop,    Guillaume,    351;    Jean,    351;    Nicolas, 

285,   351,    (Rectorial   address)    354;    Michel, 

351 
Copenhagen,    University   of,   605,   617;    Her- 

redag  of  (1530),  612  sq. ;   Recess  of  (1536), 

620 
Copernicus,  707 

Cordier,  Mathurin,  286,  .351,  372 
Corneto,  see  Castellesi 


Cornwall,  rising  in  (1549),  485 

Coronel,  Pablo,  400 

Corpus  Christi  Day,  503 

Corpus  Juris  Canonici,  the,  686 

Corro,  Antonio  del,  406 

Corsica,  88,  94 

Cortes,  Fernando,  101 

Cortese,  Gregorio,  33,  379,  641  sqq.,  647 

Corvinus,  Matthias,  King  of  Hungary,  198 

Cosimo    I,    Duke    of    Florence,    72,    82,    88, 

396  sq. 
Cotta,  Frau,  110 
Coney,  Edict  of  (1535),  286  sq. 
Council  of  the  North,  in  England,  471 
Counter-Reformation,   the,  chap,  xviii,  pas- 
sim; in  Italy,  33,  647;  in  Switzerland,  338; 

in  Germany,  chap,  vi,  passim;   in  Spain, 

646 
Count's    war    (Grevefeide) ,   the    (1534),  230, 

614  sq. 
Courrieres,  de,  525 

Courtenay,  Edward,  see  Devonshire,  Earl  of 
Coverdale,  Miles,  Bishop  of  Exeter,  501,  539; 

his  version  of  the  Bible,  465 
Cox,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Ely,  .5.57,  565,  575 
Craig,  John,  591 
Cranach,  Lucas,  159 
Cranmer,  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

219,  241,  433,  439  sqq.,  481,  484,  495,  503,  508, 

521,  538-42,  .'559 
Cremona,  siege  of  (1526) ,  53 
Cre'py,  peace  of  (1.544),  78,  245,  289,  459 
Crescenzio,  Marcello,  Cardinal,  671  sqq. 
Croft,  Sir  James,  526 
Crome,  Edward,  539 
Cromwell,  Thomas,  see  Essex,  Earl  of 
Crowley,  Robert,  490 
Croy,  Guillaume  de,  Sire  de  Chievres,  38 
Cruciger,  Caspar,  207,  250 
Cujus  regio  ejus  religio,  278 
Cum  ad  nihil,  the  Bull  (1531),  413  sq. 
Curione,  Celio  Secoudo,  382,  385,  391,  716 
Curwen,  Dr  Richard,  438 
Cusano,  Benedetto,  390 

Dacke,  Nels,  627 

Dacre,  Thomas,  Lord,  420 

Dacres,  William,  Lord,  441 

Dalecarlia,  621,  624 

Damvillers,  93 

Daniel,    Francois,    352:    Calvin's    letters   to, 

353 
Dante,  Alighieri,  2,  35,  128 
Dare,  Jurieu  van  der  (Georgius  Aportanus), 

160 
Darnley,  Henry  Stewart,  Lord,  4.58,  560,  582 
Dataria,  the,  673 
Dati,  Giuliano,  .379 
De  dementia,  the,  Calvin's  Commentary  on, 

352  sq. 
De  Donatione  Constantini  Magni,  the,  694 
De  haeretico  comhurendo,  the  statute,  540 
Decretals,  the  Papal,  135 


Index 


841 


Denmark,    early    history    of,   599    sqq. ;    the 

Reformation  in,  602-17;   and  Liibeck,  war 

between,  228  sqq. 
Denny,  Sir  Anthony,  475 
Descartes,  Rene,  690,  710 
Devonshire,    Edward    Courtenay,    Earl    of, 

523-8,  544 
Diaz,  Alfonso,  403 
Diaz,  Juan,  403;  murder  of,  254 
Dinaut,  89 
Disputations :    Luther's,  with  John  Eck,  135 ; 

the  Zurich  (1523),  317  sqq. ;  at  Baden  (1526), 

326;  at  Bern  (1528),  327 
Ditmarschen,  revolt  of  the,  601 
Dolet,  :6tienne,  288;  his  death,  291 
DoUinger,  J.  J.  von,  30 
Dominicans,  the,  and   the  religious  revival, 

106,  161 
Dominici,  Giovanni,  3 
Doria,  Andrea,  49,  57  sqq.,  69,  74,  77,  81  sq., 

430 
Doria,  Filippino,  58 
Dorset,   Henry  Grey,    Marquis  of,   422;    see 

Suffolk,  Duke  of 
Douglas,  Gawiu,  691 
Douglas,  Lady  Margaret,  445,  458 
Douglas,  Sir  George,  454,  457 
Dragut,  Turkish  corsair,  86 
Drury,  Sir  William,  514 
Dryander,  James,  see  Enzinas,  Jaime  de 
Dryander,  see  Enzinas,  Francisco  de 
Dual  Monarchy,  nucleus  of  the  present,  150 
Dublin,  siege  of  (1534) ,  442 
Ducas,  Demetrios,  400 
Dudley,  Ambrose,  Lord,  518 
Dudley  conspiracy,  the  (15.56),  544 
Dudley,  Guilford,  Lord,  510,  518,  528 
Dudley,  John,  Earl  of  Warwick,  see  Warwick, 

Earl  of 
Dudley,  Robert,  see  Leicester,  Earl  of 
Dudley,  Sir  Henry,  505,  544 
Dunbar,  Gawin,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  453 
Dunbar,  William,  691 
Dunkirk,  93 

Dunstable,  Cranmer's  "  Court  "  at,  440 
Duprat,   Antoine,    Archbishop  of    Sens,  147, 

284  sqq. 
Duren,  capture  of  (1543),  77,  244 
Diirer,  Albrecht,  159,  167 
Dussindale,  battle  of  (1549) ,  493 

Eberach,  Hem-y  and  Peter,  111 

Eberlin,  John,  of  Giinzburg,  159  sqq. ;  Utopian 

scheme  of,  183  sq. 
Eck,  John  (of  Ingolstadt),  29,  130,  134  sq., 

138,  162,  212,   240,  326;   his   Obelisks,  130; 

his  Loci  Communes,  172 
Eck,  John  (Official  of  Trier),  140 
Eck,  Leonard  von,  191 
Edict  of  Januai-y    (1562),  the,  304;    of  July 

(1561),  the,  301;  of  Restitution  (1561),  the, 

in  France,  303 
Edinburgh,  459,  556;  treaty  of  (1.560),  577 


Education,  Calvin's  system  of,  372  sq. ;  in 
Switzerland,  318;  in  England,  468,  503 

Edward  VI,  King  of  England,  448,  chap. 
XIV,  passim 

Egidio,  see  Gil,  Juan 

Einfeste  Burg  isl  unser  Gott,  Luther's,  201 

Einarsen,  Gisser,  Bishop  of  Skalholt,  621 

Einsiedeln,  pilgrimages  to,  105 

Eisenach,  Luther's  life  at,  109  sq. 

Elba,  84,  88 

Election  of  Charles  V  to  the  Empire,  its  sig- 
nificance, 40  sq. 

Eleonora,  Queen  of  Portugal,  and  France,  51, 
59,  73,  427 

Eliaesen,  Paul  (Povel  Helgesen),  606,  609 

Elizabeth,  Queen  of  England,  93,  441,  520,  524, 
529,  535,  544,  559-98 

Elizabeth  of  Valois,  Queen  of  Spain,  93  sq., 
566 

Ellerker,  Sir  Ralph,  446 

Elstowe,  Henry,  438 

Emser,  Jerome,  168,  172,  .321 

Enckenvoert,  Cardinal,  21 

Enclosure  commissions,  the,  in  England,  491 

Engelbrektsson.  Olaf,  Archbishop  of  Tron- 
dhjem,  618  sqq. 

Enghien,  Fraufois,  Due  d',  77  sq.,  97 

England,  the  Reformation  in,  under  Henry 
VIII,  chap,  xin,  passim ;  under  Edward  VI, 
chap.  XIV,  passiin ;  under  Philip  and  Mary, 
chap.  XV,  passim;  the  religious  settlement 
of,  under  Queen  Elizabeth,  559-98;  at- 
tempted union  with  Scotland  (1547),  487; 
social  revolution  in,  489  sq. 

Enzinas,  Francisco  de,  401  sqq. 

Enzinas,  Jaime  de,  350,  387,  402  sq. 

Episcopalianism  and  Presbyterianism,  in 
Scotland,  593 

Epistolae  Obscurorum  Virorum.,  the,  696 

Erasmistas,  the,  in  Spain,  400  sqq. 

Erasmus,  Desiderius,  9-24,  152,  162,  167  .sq., 
280,  307  sqq.,  342,  .352,  694;  Zwingli's 
relation  to,  314;  reception  of  his  writings 
in  Spain,  400  sq. ;  his  residence  and  death 
at  Basel,  355,  414;  his  letters,  critical  work 
and  religious  attitude,  697-700 

Erastianism,  595  sq. 

Erastus  (Thomas  Liiber) ,  595  sq. 

Eremites,  the  Augustinian,  106,  114, 117,  131 

Erfurt,  University  of,  Luther  at,  110  sqq. ; 
humanists  of.  111 

Erik  VII,  King  of  Denmark  (Erik  XIII, 
King  of  Sweden),  600 

Erik  XIV,  King  of  Sweden,  629 

Eriksson,  Gustaf,  603  sq.,  621;  see  Gustavus 
I  (Vasa) 

Essex,  Thomas  Cromwell,  Earl  of,  432,  440, 
442  sqq. ;  beheaded,  451  sq. ;  465 

Estates  of  Orleans,  meeting  of  (1561),  299  sqq. 

Este,  Alfonso  d',  43 

Este,  Ippolito  d',  Cardinal  of  Ferrara,  302 
sq.,  584 

Esthonia,  144 


842 


Index 


Estienne,  Robert  and  Henry,  718 

6tampes,  Madame  d',  97,98 

Eucharist,  doctrine  of  the,  209,  G45,  671,  677 
sqq. ;  decree  concerning,  330;  question  of, 
:!?.2  sq. 

Europe,  finance  of,  65 ;  settlement  of,  by  the 
Treaty  of  Cateau-Cambresis,  94 

Evangelical  Brotherhood,  the,  180,  183 

Evers,  Sir  Ralph,  460 

Excommunication,  Bull  of,  issued  against 
Henry  VIH,  67,  440,  449;  against  Martin 
Luther,  138  sq. 

Exeter,  Henry  Courtenay,  Marquis  of,  execu- 
tion of,  449 

Eyposcit  pastoralis  officii,  the  Bull  (1550),  655 

Extreme  Unction,  Sacrament  of,  672 

"  Eyguenots"  the,  at  Geneva,  362 

Faber,  Johann,  168,  212,  233,  316  sc(q.,  326 

Faber  Stapulensis,  see  Lefevre  d'Etaples 

Fabro,  Antonio  (of  Amiterno),  17 

Fagius,  Paul,  265,  477 

Faith,  rule  of,  665  sq. 

Falloppio,  Gabriele,  386,  395 

Fannio  (or  Fanino),  execution  of,  387 

Farel,  Guillaume,  282  sq.,  291  sq.,  358,  362, 

368 
Farnese,  Alessandro,  Cardinal,  255,  662;    see 

also  Paul  in,  Pope 
Farnese,  Orazio,  82 
Farnese,  Ottavio,  72,  75,  84  sq. 
Farnese,  Pierluigi,  69,  72,  80;  murder  of,  83 
Favera,   Guarino  di,  Bishop  of  Novara,  his 

Thesaurus  linguae  Graecae,  17 
Fechen,  Peter,  630 
Feckenham,  John  de,  543 
Ferdinand,  King  of  Aragon,  149  sq.,  399 
Ferdinand  I,  Emperor,    66  sq.,  143,  150,  169 

sqq.,l^»0,  197, 199,  201,  216,218,  221,  233  sqq., 

267,  272,  276  sq.,  336,  537;   elected  King  of 

Bohemia  and    Hungary,    198  sq. ;    elected 

King  of  the  Romans,  214 ;  and  the  Council 

of  Trent,  674  sqq. 
Feria,  Count  de,  549,  561  sqq. 
Fernandes,  Alfonso,  401 
Feron,  Robert,  442 
Ferrar,  Nicholas,  389 

Ferrar,  Robert,  Bishop  of  St  David's,  538  sq. 
Ferrara,  the  Reform  at,  384 ;  Calvin  at,  358, 

.385;    Alfonso,  Duke  of,  44,  54  sqq.,  60  sq., 

67;  Ercole,  Duke  of,  384  sqq. 
Ferreni,  Zaccaria,  30 
Feuerbacher,  Ma  tern,  182  sq.,  187  sq. 
Feyt,  Florentius,  6.31 
Ficino,  Marsilio,  4,  7,  8, 16,  701 
Fidei  ratio  ad  Cnrolum  Imperatorem,  the,  335 
Field  of  Cloth  of  Gold,  42,  417 
Fiesco,  Gianluigi,  conspiracy  of,  81  sq. 
Finance  of  Europe,  65 
Finst-fruits,   Act  for  abolishing  paj'raent  of 

from  England  to  Rome  (1532),  437,  439 
Fisher,  John,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  428,  431, 

433,  436,  441 ;  execution  of,  443 


Fitzgerald,  Thomas,  Lord,  442 

Fitzwilliam,  Admiral,  472 

Five  Scholars  of  Lausanne,  execution  of  the, 
293 

Flaminio,  Marcantonio,  17,  2  ,  379,  389  sq., 
398 

Flanders,  76,  102;  English  commercial  truce 
with  (1528),  430 

Fleuranges,  R.  de  La  Marck,  Lord  of,  71 

Florence,  60;  the  Renaissance  in,  3;  Pla- 
tonism  introduced  into,  4;  fall  of  (1530), 
25,  60 ;  joins  the  League  of  Cognac,  55 ;  the 
Medici  expelled  and  a  Republic  established 
in  (1527),  56;  restoration  of  the  Medici 
(1530),  60 :  Platonic  Academy  of,  702 

Flysteden,  Peter,  202 

Folengo,  Giambattista,  390 

Fonseca,  Alonso,  Archbishop  of  Toledo,  401 

Fonseca,  Diogo  da,  415 

Fontaiuebleau,  Edict  of  (1540),  288 

Fonzio,  Bartolommeo,  381  sq. 

Forty-two  Articles,  the,  508 

Fourteen  of  Meaux,  execution  of  the,  290 

Foxe,  Edward,  430 

Fracastan,  G.,  16 

Franc,  Jeanne  le,  marries  John  Calvin,  360 

France,  wars  and  invasions  of  (1522-3). 
45  sqq.,  420  sqq.;  (1543-4),  78,  457 
sqq.;  (1549),  493;  internal  developments 
of,  95  sqq. ;  negotiations  of  German 
Princes  with,  270  sq. ;  the  Reformation  in, 
chap.  IX,  passim;  the  Reformed  Church 
in,  346-9;  Calvin's  influence  in,  349, 
373;  English  alliances  with,  416  sq.,  429; 
Scotch  alliance  with,  422;  treaties  with 
(1525),  425;  Cardinal  Wolsey's  mission 
to,  428;  her  connexion  with  Scotland, 
499,  558,  574-7;  and  England,  their  war 
against  Charles  V  (1528)  and  its  effect 
upon  trade,  429;  her  First  War  of  Re- 
ligion (1562),  584 

Francis  I,  King  of  France,  23  sqq.,  32,  143, 
232  sq.,  315,  416-29,  440,  449;  his  struggle 
with  Charles  V,  chaps,  ii,  iii,  passim ;  and 
the  Reformation  in  France,  281-92;  his 
character,  38,  and  death,  82;  Calvin's 
Letter  to,  .356;  interviews  with  Henry 
VIII,  417,  439 

Francis  II,  King  of.  France,  93,  29()-9, 
499,  548,  557;  and  the  Council  of  Trent, 
674  sqq. 

Franciscans,  the,  and  the  religious  revival, 
106,  161:  reform  of  the,  in  Spain,  400;  in 
Italy,  647 

Franck,  Sebastian,  223 

Frankenhausen,  battle  of  (1525),  188 

Frankfort,  conferences  of  (1531),  217; 
(1539),  238 

Frauenberg,  storming  of  the  (1525),  188  sq. 

Frederick  I,  King  of  Denmark  and  Norway, 
169,  224,  229;  and  the  Reformation  in 
Denmark,  608-14,  and  Norway,  618  sq. 

Frederick  II,  Elector  Palatine,  229,  258 


Index 


843 


Frederick  III,   Elector  Palatine,  595  sq.,  619 
Frederick  III  the  Wise,   Elector  of  Saxony, 

41,  IK),  132-72,  606 
Freducci,  Ludovico,  lord  of  Fermo,  14 
Free    Bailiwicks,    the,    in    Switzerland,    331 
"  Free  "  Churches,  200 
Fregoso,  Cesare,  murder  of,  76 
Fregoso,  Federigo,  Cardinal;  33,  379  sq. 
Frei,  Felix,  310 
Frei,  Jacob,  331 

Freiburg  in  Breisgau,  capture  of  (1525),  182 
French  Renaissance,  the,  710-12 
Fresze,  Hermann,  618 
Friedwald,  treaty  of  (1552),  271 
Friesland,  102 

Friis,  Jorgeu,  Bishop  of  Viborg,  610,  613 
Froben,  John,  308,  355 
Froschauer  (Swiss  printer),  308,  312  sq.,  316 
Frundsberg,  Georg  von,  54,  55,  190,  197 
Fueuterabbia,  44,  46,  418,  423 
Fuggers,  the,  of  Augsburg,  40,  63,  127,  153; 

Jacob  Fugger,  153 ;  Anton  Fugger,  258 
Fiirstenberg,  Count  William  von,  78 

Gabelle  du  sel,  in  France,  96 

Gaboldino,  Antonio,  386  sq. 

Gadd,  Hemming,  Bishop  of  Linkoping,  603, 
607 

Gaismayr,  Michael,  190  sq. 

Galateo,  Girolamo,  381 ;  his  Confession,  382 

Galilei,  Galileo,  707 

Gallars,  Nicolas  des,  302,  592 

Galle,  Peter,  624 

Gallicanism,  old  and  new,  95 

Gallo,  Niccolo,  393 

Garci-Arias  (Maestro  Blanco),  406 

Garcia,  Fray  de,  541 

Garcia,  Juan,  408 

Gardiner,  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  430, 
475-508,  517-42 

Gardiner,  William,  414 

Gargantuu,  by  Francois  Rabelais,  287 

Giirtnerbriider,  the,  of  Salzburg,  223 

Gassendi,  Pierre,  691 

Gates,  Sir  John,  520 

Gattinara,  Mercurino,  52,  148,  210 

Geiler  von  Kaisersberg,  29 

Geissberger,  Franz,  3.31 

Gelders,  duchy  of,  75,  77,  236,  242 ;  conquest 
of  (1.543).  244,  Charles,  Duke  of,  43,  51,  60, 
72,  75,  102 

Geneva,  Bishop  of,  position  occupied  by  the, 
359 ;  relations  with  the  House  of  Savoy,  361 ; 
revolt  against,  362;  political  constitution 
and  history  of,  358-63;  Calvin's  connexion 
with,  358,  363-74;  his  College  and  Academy 
at,  373 

Genoa,  sack  of  (1522),  45;  Republic  estab- 
lished in  (1528),  59;  conspiracy  at  (1546),  81 

Gentile,  Valentino,  393 

George,  bastard  son  of  Maximilian  I,  102 

Grermany,  chaps,  iii,  iv,  passim ;  national 
opposition   to  Rome  in,  chap,   v,  passim; 


Social  Revolution  and  Catholic  Reaction  in, 

chap.   VI,  passim ;    conflict  of  creeds  and 

parties  in,  chap,  vii,  passim  ;  Religious  war 

in,  chap,  viu,  passim;  popular  religious  life 

in,  105  sqq. ;  effect  of  Charles  V's  reign  on, 

145  sq. 
Geroldseck,  Diebold  von,  321,  337 
Gerson,  Jean,  281 

Geyer,  Florian,  182,  188;  death  of,  190 
Ghent,  revolt  of  (1539),  74  sq. 
Giammaria  (Count  of  Verrucchio),  18 
Giberti,  Giammatteo,  Bi-shop  of  Verona,  23, 

33,  60,  379,  398,  641  sqq.,  660 
Gioberti,  Vincenzio,  35 
Gil,  Juan  (Egidio),  404  sq. 
Giorgio,  Domenico,  387 
Giovenale,  Latino,  379 
Giovio,  Paolo,  15,  21 
Giustiniaui,  Paolo,  647 
Gjoe,  Mogens,  611,  614 
(ilapion,  Jean,  148 
Glareanus,  see  Loriti 
Glencairn,  Alexander  Cunningham,  Earl  of, 

456  sq.,  558 
God,  the  Will  of,  715  sq. 
Goes,  Damiao  de,  414  sq. 
Goldli,  George,  337 
Goldli,  Heinrich,  307 
Goletta,  capture  of  (1535),  69 
Gonesius,  Peter,  637 
Gonzaga,    Ercole    di.    Cardinal    of    Mantua, 

676-S2 
Gonzaga,  Ferrante  di.  Governor  of  Milan,  70, 

81,  83  sqq.,  88 
Gonzaga,  Giulia  di,  Duchess  of  Traietto  and 

Countess  of  Fondi,  33,  390  sq. 
Gonzales,  Juan,  406 
Goodman,  Christopher,  585,  591 
Gorka,  Andreas,  636 
Gothus,    Laurentius     Petri,    Archbishop    of 

Upsala,  630 
Gozzadini,  Giovanni,  17 
Grafenfehde   (Grevefeide) ,  the,   in  Denmark 

(1534),  230,  614  sqq. 
Grammont,  de,  Bishop  of  Tarbes,  embassy  of, 

427  sq. 
Granada,  Luis  de,  409 
Granvelle,  Antoine  de.  Bishop  of  .\rras,  93, 

240  sq.,  258,  268 
Grassi,  Francesco,  83 
Gratius,  Ortwinus  (Ortwin  de  Graes),  696 
Gravamina  Germanicae  Nationis,  by  Jakob 

Wimpheling,  29 
Gravelines,  battle  of  (1558),  93;  interview  of 

(1520,42,417 
Great  Harrn,  the,  472 
Grebel,  Jacob  and  Conrad,  322 
Greek  New  Testament  (Erasmus'),  699 
Greek  pointing-press,  established  at  Verona, 

23 ;  in  Germany,  111 
Gregorovius,  Ferdinand,  19,  25,  28 
Gregory  XIII,  Pope   (Hugo  Buoncompagni), 

410,  631  sq. 


844 


Index 


Grey  Friars  Observants,  the,  441 

Grey,  Lady  Jane,  510,  513  sqq.,  528 

Grey,  Leonard,  Lord,  452, 471 

Grey,  Thomas,  Lord,  528 

Gribaldi,  Matteo,  393 

Grilleuzone,  386 

Grimani,  Dominic,  Cardinal,  15,  458 

Gringore,  Pierre,  his  Le  Jeu  du  Prince  des 

Sots,  281 
Gropper,  Johann,  240,  243,  667 
Grosswardein,  treaty  of  (1538),  236,  242 
Grumbach,  Wilhelm  von,  190,  274 
Griit,  Joachim  am,  322,  375 
Grynaeus,  Simon,  355 
Guasto,  Alfonso  del,  53,  55,  72,  77 
Gndmundarsen,  David,  621 
Guerrero  (Archbishop  of  Granada),  676  sqq. 
Guidiccioni,  Cardinal,  653 
Guidocerius,  Agacius,  17 
Guienne,  revolt  of  (1548) ,  96,  492 
Gaines,    treaty    of    (1520),   416;     capture    of 

(1558) ,  93 
Guise,  Charles  de,  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  83, 

91  sqq.,  98,  296  sq.,  302,  680-4 
Guise,  Claude,  Due  de,  98 
Guise,  Francois,  Due  de,  87,  98,  545  sqq. 
Guise,  Jean  de,  Cardinal  of  Lorraine,  98 
Guise,  siege  and  capture  of  (1557-8),  92  sq. 
Guises,  the,  and  Diane  de  Poitiers,  98;  and 

the  Reformation  in  France,  296-9 
Gustavus  I  (Vasa),  King  of  Sweden,  228  sq., 

245,  615,  621-9 
Gyllenstjerna,  Christina,  603 
Gyldenstjerne,  Knud,  Bishop  of  Odense,  608, 

613  sqq.,  619 

Haddington,  capture  of  (1548),  488 

Hakon,  King  of  Norway,  600 

Hale,  John,  442 

Hales,  John,  his  Discourse  of  the   Coinmon 

Weal,  490  sq. 
Halle,  Catholic  League  of  (1533) ,  220,  232 
Haller,  Berthold,  315,  327 
Hallora,  John,  447 
Hamelin,  Philibert,  292 
Hamilton,  John,  Primate  of  Scotland,  558 
Hamilton,  Patrick,  554 
Hampton  Court,  treaty  of  (1562) ,  584 
Hancoc;k,  Thomas,  480 
Haner  (German  reformer),  333 
Haugest,  Charles  de,  350 
Hannart,  Franz,  156,  157,  171 
Hanseatic  League,  the,  228,  614 
Harpsfield,  Nicholas,  501 
Hastings,  Henry,  560 
Hastwell,  Sir  Edmund,  383 
Havre,  English  expedition  to  (1562),  584 
Hawkes,  Thomas,  538 
Heath,   Nicholas,   Archbishop  of  York,  484, 

501,  521,  543,  564-71 
Hedio,  Caspar,  207,  328,  333 
Hegel,  George  William  Frederick,  714 
Hegius,  Alexander,  168 


Heideck,  George  von,  270 

Heidelberg,  238;  League  of  (1553),  274 

Heilbronn,  205 

Held,  Matthias,  German  Vice-Chancellor,  235 

Heldiug,  Michael,  suffragan  Bishop  of  Mainz, 

264 
Helfenstein,  Count  Liidwig  von,  187 
Helius  Eobanus  Hessus  (Eobau  of  Hesse),  111 
Helvetic  Confession,  the  first  (1536),  339 
Henneberg,  AVilliam,  Count  of,  188 
Henry  II,  King  of  France,  26,  65,  76,  80,  82 

sqq.,   270  sq.,   486  sq.,    492    sqq.,   505,   526, 

545  .sq.,  560 ;  and  the  Reformation  in  Fi-ance, 

292  sqq. 
Henry  VII,  King  of  England,  555 
Henry  VIII,  King   of    England,  chap,    xiii, 

passim,  26,  42  sqq.,  67,  77  sqq.,  172,  229  sqq., 

474  sqq.,  556 
Herculano  (Portuguese  historian),  413 
Heresbach,  Conrad,  2-36 
Hernandez,  Julian,  406  sq. 
Hertford,  Edward  Seymour,  Earl  of,  459  sq., 

474  sq. ;  see  Somerset,  Duke  of 
Hesdin,  72,  89,  94;  siege  of  (1522),  420 
Hesse,  Philip,  Landgrave  of,  156,  169,  189-254, 

329,  3.34  sqq. 
Hesse,  "William,  Landgrave  of,  270  sq. 
Hetzer,  Ludwig,  223 
Heu,  Gaspard  de,  297 
Heusenstamm,  Sebastian  von,  251 
Hipler,  Wendel,  184,  187 
Hobbes,  Thomas,  691 
Hoby,  Sir  Philip,  495 
Hoeu,  Cornelius  van,  332 
Hoffman,  Conrad,  314,  320 
Hofmann,  Melchior,  224,  611 
Holcot,  Robert,  251 
Holgate,   Robert,   Archbishop  of   York,  448, 

4.52,  471,  521 
Holstein,  Frederick,  Duke  of,  228 
Homilies,  Cranmer's  Book  of,  481 
Hooper,  John,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  497  sqq., 

539 
Home,  Robert,  Bishop   of   Winchester,  568, 

586.  593  sq. 
Hosius,   Stanislaus,   Cardinal,   631,  636,  676, 

682 
Hotman,    Francois,   his    Letter    sent    to    the 

Tiger  of  France ,  297 
Hottinger,  Nicholas,  319 
Houghton,  Prior,  442 
Howard,   Catharine,   Queen   of   Henry  VIII, 

451;  beheaded,  453 
Howard,  Thomas,  Lord,  445 
Hoya,  Count  Johann  von,  2.30 
Hubmaier,  Balthasar,  178 
Huguenots,  the,  chap.  IX,  passim;  persecution 

of,  283  sqq.,  346-8 
Hugues,  Bezanson,  362 
Humanists,   of  Erfurt,   111 ;   breach  between 

Reformers  and,  168 
Hungary  Turkish  wars  in ,  86, 206  sq. ;  Turkish 

conquest  of  (1541),  242;  cause  of  its  ruin  at 


Index 


845 


the  battle  of  Mohacs,  197  sq. ;   Ferdinand 

I's  treaty  with  (1538),  236;   and  Bohemia, 

197-9 
Huntingdon,  Henry  Hastings,  Earl  of,  582 
Hus,  John,  175;  On  the  Church,  313 
Hut,  Hans,  224 
Hutten,   Ulrich    von,   9,    152    sqq.,    314,  694, 

696  sq. 

Iceland  and  Norway,  the  Reformation  in, 
617-21 

Idealism,  Italian,  S4  sq. 

Illyricus,  Flacius,  see  Vlacich 

Illyricus,  Thomas,  291 

Imperia,  her  epitaph,  15 

Index  Expurgatorins,  288 

Index  Lihrorum  Prohibitorum,  the,  676,686  sq. 

Indies,  the  Spanish,  101 

Indulgences,  sale  and  practice  of,  121-32; 
Zwingli  and,  313 

Inghirami,  Fedro,  8,  15,  16 

Inquisition,  the,  in  the  Netherlands,  103; 
the  Roman,  381  sqq.,  649-51;  the  Spanish, 
99,  399  sqq.,  650;  the  Portuguese,  412  sqq. 

Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,  the,  448 

Interim,  the  Augsburg  (1548),  and  its  results, 
264  sqq. ;  the  Leipzig,  266 

Introduction  to  Christian  Doctrine,  by 
Zwingli,  320 

Ipswich,  Wolsey's  College  at,  434 

Ireland,  policy  of  Henry  VIII  in,  471  sq. 

Irish  Rebellion  (1534),  442 

Isabella,  Queen  of  Castile,  399 

Isabella,  Queen  of  Denmark,  169,  602 

Isabella  of  Portugal,  Queen  of  Spain,  53,  74, 
424 

Isny,  205 

Italy,  the  Renaissance  in,  chap,  i,  passim; 
conflicts  of  Habsburg  and  Valois  in,  chaps. 
II,  m,  passim ;  Charles  V's  invasion  of 
(1526),  24;  decadence  of,  27  sq. ;  the 
Counter-Reformation  in,  33,  647  sq. ;  the 
fate  of,  ;i4  sq. ;  resources  of,  (54 ;  leagues  of 
the  powers  of,  60,  67;  Reformation  in, 
378-99;  German  influence  in,  380 

Jacob  of  Jiiterbogk,  111 

Jacobsbriider,  the,  105 

Jakobsson  (Sunnenvfcder) ,  Peter,  623 

James  IV,  King  of  Scotland,  553 

James  V,  King  of  Scotland,  448,  453-6,  555 

Jamet,  Leon,  384 

Jan  of  Leyden  (Jan  Beuckelssen),  225  sqq. 

Jedburgh,  destruction  of,  422 

Jensen,  Peder,  609 

Jerningham,  Sir  Robert,  429  sq. 

Jesuit  Fathers,  the,  651-9;  at  the  Council  of 

Trent,  667  sq.,  671 
Jewel,  John,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  161 
Joao  III,  King  of  Portugal,  172,  412  sqq. 
Johan  III,  King  of  Sweden,  629-32 
John,  Bishop  of  Meissen,  238,  243 
John,  Don,  of  Austria,  409 


Jonas,  Justus,  201,  207 

Joner,  Wolfgang,  Abbot  of  Kappel,  320,  337 

Jonsson,  Thure,  626  sq. 

Jud,  Leo,  223,  316,  318 

Jiilich-Cleves,  duchy  of,  75,  236,  239,  243  sqq. 

Julius  Exclusus,  dialogue,  9 

Julius  II,  Pope  (Giuliano  della  Rovere),  5-10, 

30,  281,  426 
Julius  III,  Pope  (Giovanni  Maria  del  Monte), 

85  sqq.,  90,  399,  519,  655,  663  sqq.,  670-2 
Justification,  doctrine  of,  645,  667  sq. 
Jutland,  rising  in  (1534),  614  sq. 
Juusten,  Paulus,  629 

Kalands,  the,  in  Germany,  108 
Kalmar,  the  Union  of  (1397),  228,  600 
Kappel,  first  peace  of  (1529) ,  332 ;  battle  and 

second  peace  of  (1.531),  216,  337  sq. 
Karl  Knudson,  see  Charles  VIII 
Kaser,  Leonhard.  202 
Kauffi,  Kilian,  331 
Kelso,  420,  456 
Kempen,  Stephen,  161 
Kempten,  205;  Abbots  of,  176 
Kent,  Holy  Maid  of  (Elizabeth  Barton),  441 
Kent,  rising  in  (1554),  527 
Kepler,  Johann,  6iX) 
Ret,  Robert,  his  rebellion  (1549),  492 
Kettenbach,  Henry  of,  161 
Kha.iT  Eddin,  see  Barbarossa  II 
Kildare,  Gerald,  Earl  of,  442,  471 
King's  Book,  the,  448 
Kingston,  Sir  Anthony,  544 
Kingston,  Sir  William,  435 
Kitchin,  Anthony,  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  571 
Knight,  Dr,  429 
Knightly  order,  the,  154 
Knights'  war,  the  (1522),  155 
KnipperdoUinck,  Burgomaster    of    Miinster, 

226  sq.,  624 
Knox,  John,  374,  495,  502,  556-€0,  573  sqq., 

591  sqq.,  691;  his  First  Book  of  Discipline, 

593 
Kok,  Jorgen,  610 
Krumpeu,  Otte,  603 

La  Baume,  Pierre  de,  3()1  sq. 

La  Brosse  (French  ambassador) ,  468 

La  Bruyere,  Jean  de,  711 

La  Cava  (Giovanni  Tommaso  Sanfelice) ,  390. 

666 
La  Forge,  :6tienne  de,  354 
La  Fuentc,  Constantino  Ponce  de,  404  sqq. 
La  Marck,  Rf)bert  de.  Lord  of  Bouillon,  43, 

60,  89 
La    Quadra,  Alvaro    de,    Bi.shop    of   Aquila, 

582  .sqq. 
La  Ramee,  Pierre  de,  710 
La  Renaudie,  Godefroy  de  Barry,  Seigneur 

de,  297 
La  Rochelle,  revolt  of  (1542),  96 
Lachmann  (German  reformer),  160 
Lacizi,  Paolo,  391 


846 


Index 


Lambert,  Fran9ois,  200 

Landino,  Cristoforo,  701 

Landrecies,  siege  of  (1543),  77,  457 

Landstuhl,  fall  of  (1523).  155  sq. 

Lang,  Matthew,  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Salz- 
burg, 29,  147,  182 

Lange,  John,  111,  112 

Langnet,  Hubert,  384,  578 

Lannoy,  Charles  de,  48,  55  sq. 

Las  Casas,  Bartolome  da,  101 

Lascaris,  John,  16 

Lasco,  John  a  (Laski),  477,  502,  617,  636  sq. 

Last  Jiidgme?it,  Michelangelo's,  34 

Lateran  Council,  the  Fifth  (1512-17),  9,  30-2, 
639 

Latimer,  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  161,445, 
490,  521,  538-41 

Latin  Renaissance,  the,  700-10 

Latins,  the,  contrasted  intellectually  with  the 
Teutons,  692  sq. 

Lauffen,  encounter  of  (1534),  221 

Laurentius,  Jesuit  Father,  631 

Lautrec,  Odet  de  Foix,  Vicomte  de,  24,  44  sq., 
57sqq.,  97,  429  sq. 

Lavater.  Rudolf,  337 

Laynez,  Diego  (Jacobus),  302,  652-7,  667  sq., 
671,  679  sq. 

Lay  ton,  Brian,  460 

Le  Catelet,  94 

Le  Jay,  Claude,  652  sqq. 

Le  Jen  clu  Prince  des  Sots,  by  Pierre  Grin- 
gore,  281 

Le  Riviere  (Jean  le  Ma9on) ,  293 

League  of  Freedom  (1525),  23 

Leclerc,  Jean,  283 

Leclerc,  Pierre,  290 

Lee,  Roland,  Bishop  of  Coventry  and  Lich- 
field, 471 

Lee,  Edward,  Archbishop  of  York,  426,  452 

Lefevre  d'^l^taples,  Jacques,  282;  his  trans- 
lation of  the  Bible,  283  sq. ;  his  death, 
287 

Lefevre,  Pierre,  652 

Legists,  school  of,  in  France,  95 

Leibniz,  Gottfried  Wilhelm,  691,  707 

Leicester,  Robert  Dudley,  Earl  of,  518;  his 
connexion  with  Queen  Elizabeth,  582 

Leipheim,  peasants'  rising  at  (1525),  181  sq. 

Leipzig  Interim,  the,  266 

Leipzig,  Luther's  disputation  at,  135 

Leith,  459;  siege  of  (1560),  577 

Leitzkau,  assembly  of  clergy  at  (1512),  129 

Leland,  John. 469 

Lennox,  John  Stewart,  Earl  of,  454 

Lennox,  Matthew  Stewart,  Earl  of,  457  sq., 
555  sq. 

Leno,  Giuliano,  12 

Lenten  observance,  in  Switzerland,  316 

Leo  X,  Pope  (Giovanni  de'  Medici),  4,  8, 
10-19,  22,  30-2,  40-4,  121,  131  sqq.,  418, 
426,  610 

Leon,  Juan  Ponce  de,  406 

Leon,  Luis  de,  409 


Lerma,  Pedro  de,  401  sq. 
Lescun,  Thomas  de,  45,  97 
L'Estoile.  Pierre  de,  352 
Lethington,  see  Maitland 
Leto,  Pomponio,  32 

Leyva,  Antonio  de,  44,  48,  50,  53,  58  sq.,  72 
Libel  of  Reformation,  the,  675 
Liberty  of  a  Christian  Man,  by  Martin  Lu- 
ther, 136 
Licet  ab  initio,  the  Bull  (1542) ,  381 
Licet  dehitum pastor alis  officii,  the  Bull  (1549), 

655 
Liege,  102 

Ligham,  Dr,  Dean  of  the  Arches,  431 
Ligurio,  Alfonso,  411 
Lindau, 205 

Lindholm,  treaty  of  (1393),  600 
Lindsay,  Sir  David,  .555,  691 
Lippomano,  Girolamo  and  Luigi,  379 
Lippomano,  Bishop  of  Verona,  671 
Lismaniui,  Francisco,  635,  637 
Lit  de  Justice,  the  (1527) ,  95 
Literature,   under  Pope  Leo  X,   15;    of  the 

Reformation,  136,  159;  chap,  xix 
Little  Gospel,  the,  107 
Livonia,  144 
Lizet,  Pierre,  288 
L'Hopital,  Michel  de,  297,  347 
Loaysa,  Garcia  de.  Cardinal,  26,  217 
Loci  Communes,  by  Philip  Melauchthon,  165, 

233,    380;    by    John    Eck    of    Ingolstadt, 

172 
Locke,  John,  691 
Lodi,fallof  (1523),  48 
Lollio,  Alberto,  384 

Longland,  John,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  433 
Loriti,  Heinrich,  of  Glarus  (Glareanus),  308, 

314 
Lorraine    bishoprics,   French    occupation  of, 

87 
Lorraine,  Rene  de  Vaudemont,  Duke  of,  87; 

Anthony,  Duke  of,  190,  191,  195 
Losada,  Cristobal  de,  406 
Louis  11,  King  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia,  198 
Louis  XI,  King  of  France,  37 
Louis  XII,  King  of  France,  281,  308 
Louise  of  Savoy,  Duchess  of  Angouleme,  46, 

52,  59,  97.  423 
Louvain,  Confession  of,  80 
Lovel,  Sir  Thomas,  417 
Loyola,  St  Ignatius  (Don  Inigo  Lopez  de  Re- 

calde),  401,  651-9;  his  Spiritual  Exercises, 

657  sq. 
Liibeck,  municipal  revolution  in,  228  sq.,  231 ; 

at  war  with  the  Scandinavian  North.  228 

sqq.,  614  sq.,  622 
Liiber.  Thomas  (Erastus),  595  sq. 
Lucca,  the  Reform  at,  391  sq. 
Luder,  Peter,  111 

Ludwig  V,  Elector  Palatine,  238  sq. 
Luna,  Count  de,  683 
Luna,  Juan  de,  83 
Lund,  dispute  concerning  see  of,  610 


Index 


847 


Luneburg,  Ernest,  Duke  of,  169,  221 

Lunge,  Vincent,  618  sqq. 

Lupetino,  Baklo,  383 

Lupfen,  Count  Siegniund  von,  177 

Lupset,  Thomas,  4i)0 

Luther,  Hans,  109,  110,  116 

Luther,  Martin,  chap,  iv,  passim,  8,  19,  21, 
148-55,  162-8,  174,  206  sq.,  213,  223, 
250,  309  sqq.,  339,  613,  690  sqq.;  his 
Theses,  123,  128-32;  his  New  Testament, 
164;  his  attitude  towards  the  Peasants' 
Revolt,  193  sq. ;  his  hymns,  201 ;  his 
writings,  136,  201;  at  the  Conference  of 
Marburg,  207  sqq. ;  as  a  Reformer,  343-6 ; 
and  Zwiugli,  208,  313  sqq.,  345  sq.;  and 
Erasmus,  700;  philosophical  ideas  of,  713 
sq(i. ;  his  death,  252 ;  his  statue  at  Worms, 
208 

Lutheranism,  161  sqq.,  200;  and  Catholicism, 
conriict  of,  chap,  vii,  passim 

Lutherans,  persecution  of  the,  in  Germany, 
202;  in  France,  285  sq. 

Luxemburg,  76-8,  87 

Luzeru,  Diets  of  (1521),  315:  (1524),  324 

Lyons,  financial  centre  at,  64  sq. 

Lyra,  Nicholas  de,  111,  694 

Machabaeus  (John  Macalpine) ,  555 

Machiavelli,  Niccolo,  5,  34,  .35,  118 

Madeleine,  Princess  of  France,  Queeu  of  Scot- 
land, 455 

Madrid,  treaty  of  (1526),  51,  426 

Madruzzo,  Christofero,  Cardinal  of  Trent, 
661  sqq. 

Madruzzo,  Ludovico,  Bishop  of  Trent,  676 

Magdeburg,  pictures  at,  seen  by  Luther, 
109  sq. ;  siege  and  capitulation  of  (1550), 
269  sq. 

Magni,  Joannes  (Johan  Magnussou),  Arch- 
bishop of  Upsala.  622-5 

Magno,  Marcantonio,  390 

Magnusson,  Peter,  Bishop-elect  of  Vesteras, 
623 

Maillard,  Olivier,  280 

Mainz,  Albrecht  of  Brandenburg,  Elector  of, 
40  sq. 

Maitland  of  Lethington,  Sir  William,  550, 
558,  573  sqq. 

Malebranche,  Nicolas  de,  691 

Maligny,  Jean  de,  298 

Malines,  102 

Malta,  given  to  the  Knights  of  St  John, 
60,  68 

Malvenda,  Pedro  de,  251,  403 

"Mamelukes,"  the,  at  Geneva,  362 

Mangin,  Etienne,  290 

Manriq^ue,  Isabella,  of  Brisegna,  390 

Manrique  (Spanish  Inquisitor-General),  401 

Mansfeld,  Gebhard  and  Albrecht,  Counts  of, 
196,  215,  259,  261 

Mantua,  Federigo  di  Gonzaga,  Duke  of,  48,  57, 
60,  68,  72 

Manuel,  Nicholas,  327,  3.32 


Manz,  Felix,  322  sq. 

Manzioli,  Angelo,  his  Zodiacus  Vitae,  384 

Marbeck,  John,  466 

Marburg,  Conference  of  (1529),  207  sqq.,  333; 

Articles  of,  209;  University  of,  '-'01 
Marcellus  II,  Pope  (Marcello  Cervini),  90,534, 

655,  663  sqq.,  672  sq. 
Marciauo,  88 

Marck,  Evrard  de  la.  Bishop  of  Liege,  102 
Marck,  Robert  de  la.  Lord  of  Bouillon  and 

Sedan,  43,  60,89 
Maresio,  Giulio,  397 
Margaret,  Duchess  of  Alen^on,  283,  426 
Margaret  of  Parma,  Regent  of  the  Nether- 
lands, 578  sq. ;  Spanish  ambassador's  letter 

to,  582 
Margaret  of  Savoy,  Regent  of  the  Netherlands, 

40,  59,  66,  102,  143,  424 
Margaret,  Queen   of  Navarre,  284  sqq.,  353, 

.384 ;  her  Mirror  of  a  Sinful  Soul,  354. 
Margaret,   Queen    of    Norway,    Sweden    and 

Denmark  (the  Semiramis  of  the  North),  600 
Margaret  Tudor,  Queen  of  Scotland,  419  sq., 

422,  453  sq.,  555,  560 
Maria  of  Hungary,  Regent  of  the  Netherlands, 

66,  74,  102,  448 
Marian  persecution,  the,  533,  .538  sqq. 
Marienburg,  89,  93,  102 
Marignano,  Gian  Giacomo  Medichino,  Marquis 

of,  88 
Marillac,  Charles  de,  Archbishop  of  Vienne, 

297  sq. 
Marlar,  Anthony,  466 
Marot,  Clement,  286,  384,  690 
Marramaque,  Antonio  Pereira,  414 
Marschalk,  Nicholas,  111 
Marseilles,  siege  of  (1524),  49,  423;  conference 

of  (1.533),  68,285 
Martinengo,  Count  Massimiliano  Celso,  391 
Martineugo,  papal  Nuncio,  583 
Martinuzzi,  George,  Bishop  of  Grosswardein, 

242,  268 
Marty rology,  Crespin's,  293 
Martyrs,  Protestant,  283  sqq.,  346  sq.,  533;  the 

Oxford,  537-43 
Mary  of  Lorraine,   Queen  of  Scotland,  455, 

548,  555  sqq.,  567,  572-7 
Mary  Stewart,  Queen  of  Scots,  93,  456  sqq., 

493,  499,  548,  555  sqq.,  574,  581,  595 
Mary  Tudor,  Queen  of  England,  92  sq.,  417, 

419,  424,  428,  445,  470,  485,  499,  503  sq.,  559: 

her  reign,  chap,  xv,  passim 
Mary  Tudor,  Princess  of  England,  Queen  of 

France,  Duchess  of  Suffolk,  560 
Mary  Rose,  loss  of  the,  460,  472 
Mason,  Sir  John,  496 
Mass,  abolition  of  the,  in  Switzerland,  321 ;  in 

England,  571;   in  Scotland,  579;   language 

used  in  the,  in  England,  482;  and  the  First 

Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI,  484  sq. ;   doc- 
trine of  the,  679 
Mass-book,  Swedish  {Orclo  Missae  Sueticae), 


848 


Index 


Massaro,  Vincenzio,  381 

Matthys,  Jan,  225  sq. 

Mauburnus  (Johauues  Momboir) ,  657 

Mausoleum  of  Pope  Julius  II,  interpretation 
of  tbe  paintings,  6 

Maximilian  I,  Emperor,  29,  39  sq.,  132  sq., 
139,  176,  198 

Maxwell,  Robert,  Lord,  456 

Mayr,  Martin,  29 

Mazza,  Antonio,  513 

Mazzolini,  Silvester  (Prierias),  131, 138 

Meaux  preachers,  the,  and  the  Sorbonne,  283; 
execution  of  the  Fourteen  of,  290 

Mecklenburg,  Henry,  Duke  of,  196,  203;  Al- 
brecht,  Duke  of,  230;  George,  Duke  of,  269, 
273;  Johaiiu  Albrecht,  Duke  of,  270 

Medici,  House  of,  chap,  i,  passim 

Medici,  Alessandro  de',  Duke  of  Florence,  25, 
60,  72 

Medici,  Catharine  de',  marriage  of,  26,  98; 
and  the  Reformation  in  France,  296-304 

Medici,  Cosimo  de'  {Pater  Patriae),  4,  72,  81, 
82,88 

Medici,  Giovanni  de' :  see  Leo  X,  Pope 

Medici,  Giovanni  de'  (leader  of  the  Black 
Italian  Bauds),  44,  48,  50,  54 

Medici,  Giuliano  de',  15,  22 

Medici,  Giulio  de' :  see  Clement  VII,  Pope 

Medici,  Lorenzo  de'  (the  Magnificent),  3,  13, 
16,  22 

Mediterranean,  Muslim  pirates  in  the,  68  sq. ; 
war  in  the  (1536),  72 

Mehedia,  86 

Mehleu,  Bernhard  von,  623 

Meier,  Jacob,  of  Basel,  334 

Meier,  Sebastian,  327 

Melauchthon,  Philip,  132,  162,  165,  189-213, 
233,  240  sq.,  250,  265  sq.,  285  sq.,  402,  698, 
713;  his  Loci  Communes,  165,  233,  380 

Mellini,  Celso,  18 

Melun,  edict  of  (1533),  285 

Melville,  Andrew,  691 

Memmingen,  205 ;  Articles  of,  180 

Mendoza,  Cardinal,  3<J9,  429 

Mendoza,  Diego  de,  82-4 

Menot,  Michel,  280 

Mercenaries,  Swiss,  in  the  French  and  Im- 
perial armies,  44  sq. 

Methven,  Henry  Stewart,  Lord,  454 

Metz,  siege  of  (1552),  87,  274;  French  occupa- 
tion of,  144 

Metzler,  George,  182,  187 

Meyer,  Gerold,  337 

Meyer,  Hans,  of  Knonau,  313 

Meyer,  Marx,  229,  614  sq. 

Miani,  Girolamo,  648 

Michelangelo,  6, 12, 14,  28, 34,  395 ;  his  Giudizio 
Universale  and  Last  Judgment,  34 

ilichiel,  Giovanni,  513,  529,  534,  542,  547  sq. 

Mikkelsen,  Hans,  604,  610 

Milan,  conquest  of  (1521),  44;  siege  of  citadel 
of  (1.526),  53;  duchy  of,  its  revenues,  64 

Milanese,  the,  94 


Milne,  Walter,  558 

Miltitz,  Charles  von,  134,  168 

Minadois,  Germano,  3i)0 

Ministry,  the  Reformed,  and  Calvin,  370  sqq. 

Mino  of  Fiesole,  13 

Miiioz,  Sigismundo,  390 

Mirabilia  Romae,  the,  106,  128 

Miranda,  Sancho  Carrauza  de,  400 

Mirandola,  72,  86 

Mirror  of  a  Sinful  Soul,  by  Margaret  of 
Navarre,  354 

Modena,  56 ;  the  Reform  at,  386  sq. 

Modrzewski  (Polish  reformer),  636 

Moller,  Heinrich,  IGO 

MoUio,  Giovanni,  390 

Moluccas,  spice  trade  of  the,  101 

Molza,  Francesco-Maria,  15 

Monasteries,  suppression  of  the  English,  444, 
448,  450,  and  its  results,  467  sq. ;  their 
partial  revival  in  Mary's  reign,  543;  sup- 
pression of,  in  Switzerland,  321;  reform 
of,  in  Spain,  400;  spoliation  of,  in  Norway, 
618 

Moncada,  ITgo  de,  53,  58, 197 

Monembasia,  besieged  by  the  Turks,  72;  sur- 
render of,  74 

Montagu,  Sir  Edward,  475,  518 

Montague,  Lord  (Henry  Pole),  execution  of, 
449 

Montaigne,  Michel  de,  690,  711  sq. 

Moutalcino,  88,  94 

Montbrun,  C.  du  Puy,  Lord  of,  297 

Monte  dei  Nove,  the,  83 

Monte,  Giambattista  del,  85  sqq. 

Monte,  Giovanni  Maria  del,  see  Julius  III 

Montferrat,  Marquis  of,  death  of,  68 

Montgomery,  Gabriel  de,  296 

Montluc,  Blaise  de,  88 

Montluc,  Jean  de,  Bishop  of  Valence,  297  sq., 
300 

Montmedy,  93 

Montmorency,  Constable  de,  71  sqq.,  92,  97  sq., 
505,  517,  547 

Montobbio,  castle  of,  82 

Montpensier,  Charles  de  Bourbon,  Comte  de, 
46 ;  see  Bourbon 

Montreuil,  78 

Moor,  treaties  of  the  (1525) ,  425,  427 

Morato,  Fulvio  Peregrino,  384 

Morata,  Olympia,  384,  387 

Moray,  James  Stewart,  Earl  of,  554,  558,  581 

Mordaunt,  Sir  John,  514 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  421,  432,  436.  438,  441 ;  exe- 
cution of,  443;  his  Utopia,  490 

Morel,  Francois,  295,  302,  573 

Moriscos  of  Valencia,  the,  99 

Morlaix,  sack  of  (1522),  420 

Morone,  Giovanni  de,  Bishop  of  Modena,  240, 
386,  399.  641,  645,  660,  682  sq. 

Morone,  Girolamo,  23;  conspiracy  of,  52 

Mortensen,  Klaus,  610 

Mortenssiin,  .Jens,  618 

Morwen,  Dr,  501 


Index 


849 


r\lountjoy,  William  Blount,  Lord,  422 

Mouvans,  Antoine  de,  297 

Muhlberg,  81;  campaign  of  (1547),  260  sq. 

Muley  Hassan,  Bey  of  Tunis,  G9 

Miiller,  Hans,  of  Buigenbach,  178  sq.,  182;  his 
death,  190 

Municipal  revolutions,  in  Germany,  227  sqq. 

Muuk  (Bishop  of  Ribe),  611 

Miinster,  Anabaptists  in,  103,  222,  226  sq. ; 
strife  between  Catholics  and  Protestants  in, 
224  sq. ;  siege  of  (1535),  227 

Mimster,  Sebastian,  his  Biblia  Hehraica, 
355 

Munzer,  Thomas,  166,  182,  186-9,  .323 

Murner,  Thomas,  162,  168,  174,  331 ;  his  Here- 
tics'' Calejidar,  334 

Muslim  pirates,  in  the  Mediterranean,  68  sq. 

Musso,  war  of  (1531),  336 

Musurus,  Marcus,  16 

Mutianus  Rufus  (Conrad  Mutti),  111 

Myconius  (Oswald  Geisshiissler),  105,  161, 
207,  310,  318,  355 

Mysticism,  695 

Nacchianti  (Bishop  of  Chioggia),  666 

Namur,  89 

Nantes,  conspiracy  of  (1560),  297 

Naples,  siege  of  (1528),  58  sq. ;  subsidy  voted 
to  Emperor  Charles  V  at,  71 ;  rebellion  of 
(1548),  83;  the  Reform  at,  387-91 

Napoleon  I,  Emperor  of  the  French,  148 

Nassau,  William,  Count  of,  71,  78 

Naumburg,  Lutheran  Convention  at  (1555), 
176 

Nauplia,  besieged  by  tlie  Turks,  72 ;  surrender 
of,  74 

Navagero,  Andrea,  16 

Navagero,  Bernhard,  Bishop  of  Verona,  682 

Navarre,  94 

Navy,  Henry  VHI's,  472 

Nebrija,  Alfonso  de,  400 

Needs  of  the  German  Nation,  the,  185 

Negri,  Francesco,  381 

Negri,  Girolamo,  20 

Neo-Platonists,  the,  701 

Netherlands,  the,  resources  of,  63;  difficulties 
of  Emperor  Charles  V  in,  74  sq.,  and  his 
abdication  ceremony  in,  90;  effects  of  Treaty 
of  Cateau-Cambresis  on,  94;  Burgundy  and, 
102;  internal  developments  of,  102  sq.; 
spiritual  movements  in,  103;  revolutionists 
in,  225 

Neto,  Bras,  413 

Neumark,  Wolfgang,  Count  Palatine  of,  264 

Neville,  Sir  Henry,  505 

New  Testament,  the:  Luther's  translation, 
164;  Spanish  versions,  402,  406;  Tyndale's 
translation,  4(54  sq.;  Danish  versions,  610; 
Icelandic  version,  621 ;  Swedish  version, 
625;  the  Greek,  of  Erasmus,  699 

Newman,  John  Henry,  Cardinal,  34 

Nice,  truce  of  (1538),  73;  siege  of  (154.3),  77 

Nicene  Creed,  the,  665 

C.  M.  H.  II. 


Nicholas,  Bishop  of  Bergamo,  .'X) 

Nifo,  Agostino,  16 

Nigri,  Philip,  525 

NiKo,  Rodrigo,  378 

Noailles,  Antoine  de,  5i;3-44 

Noailles,  Fran(;ois  de.  Bishop  of  Acqs,  544,  546 

Norby,  Soren  (Danish  Admiral),  608,  623 

Nordhausen,  conference  of  (1531),  217 

Nordlingen,  205 

Norfolk,  Thomas  Howard,  second  Duke  of, 
417;  Thomas  Howard,  third  Duke,  78,  434, 
446  sq.,  456,  459,  462,  475 ;  Thomas  Howard, 
fourth  Duke,  567 

Norman,  George,  629 

North,  Edward,  first  Lord,  475 

Northampton,  William  Parr,  Marquis  of,  480, 
493 

Northampton,  Henry  Howard,  Earl  of,  499, 
506 

Northumberland,  Thomas  Percy,  Earl  of,  434, 
439 

Northumberland,  John  Dudley  (Earl  of  War- 
wick), Duke  of,  605-11,  512-21 

Norway  and  Iceland,  the  Reformation  in, 
617-21 

Notables  of  France,  57,  93,  284,  298 

Noveschi,  the,  83 

Nowell,  Alexander,  Dean  of  St  Paul's,  585 

Noyon,  peace  of  (1510),  39,  143 

Nun  of  Canterbury,  the  (Elizabeth  Barton), 
441 

Niiruberg,  Reichsregiment  at  (1521) .  151 ; 
(1524),  156;  Diets  of  (1522),  153,  (1524),  1.56, 
and  the  papal  nuncios,  170  sq. ;  spread  of 
the  Reformed  doctrines  at,  160;  and  the 
original  Pfotestants,  204  sq. ;  peace  of 
(1532),  218,  221,  2.32;  League  of  (1538),  235 

Ochino,  Bernardino,  390,  392  sq.,  477,  637,  716; 

his  Labyrinth,  710 
Odense,  Herredag  of  (1527),  612 
Oebli,  Hans,  331 
Oechsli  (Swiss  reformer),  325 
Oecolampadius,  John  (Hausschein),  155,  161, 

207,  216,  234,  289,  326  sq.,  355,  698 
Olaf ,  King  of  Denmark  and  Norway,  600 
Olafsson,  Martin,  Bishop  of  Linkoeping,  631 
Oldenburg,  Christopher,  Count  of,  230,  259, 

261,  614  sq. 
Olivier,  Francois,  297 
Ollauda,  Francesco  d',  34 
Oppede,  Jean  Meynier,  Seigneur  d',  290 
Orange,   Philibert,   Prince  of,  55  sqq. ;  Rene 

(Renatus)of  Nassau,  Prince  of,  78;  William 

of  Nassau,  Prince  of,  78 
Oratory  of  Divine  Love,  the,  379,  640,  647 
Orders,  the  religious,  and  Reform,  161,  647; 

Sacrament  of,  680,  683 
Ordinal,  the,  of  1.550,  503 
Ordinaries,  the,  in  Sweden,  629 
Ordonnances  EccU-nastiques,  by  Calvin,  370 

..sqq- 

Orebro,  synod  of  (1529),  628 

54 


850 


Index 


Orleans,  Louis,  Duke  of,  36 

Ory,  Matthieu,  Inquisitor-General,  288,  386 

Osiander,  Andreas,  160,  169,  207,  265 

Ossory,  Piers  Butler,  Earl  of,  442,  471 

Ostia,  56 

Ostrorog,  John,  634 

Otto  Henry,  Count,  Elector  Palatine,  244 

Oudenarde,  74 

Oxford,    University    of,    468,    503;    martyrs, 


Pacheoho,  Cardinal,  656,  673 

Pack,  Otto  von,  201  sq. 

Padilla,  Cristobal  de,  407 

Paget,  William,   Lord,  474,  493  sqq.,  505  sq., 

525,  531,  543 
Pagnani,  Santi,  383 
Painting,  under  Pope  Julius  II,  6  sq. ;  under 

Pope  Leo  X,  13 ;  decadence  of,  28 
Paleario,  Aonio,  395  sq. 
Palestrina,  Giovanni  Pierluigi  da,  686 
Palissy,  Bernard,  292 
Palladius  (Peder  Plade),  Bishop  of  Sjaelland, 

616  sq. 
Pallavicino,  Giambattista,  380 
Pallavicino,  P.  Sforza,  9,  10 
Palmer.  Sir  Thomas,  505  sq.,  520 
Palmier,  Pierre,  Archbishop  of  Vienne,  411 
Palz,  John  von,  114,  126 
Papino,  Fra  Girolamo,  387 
Paris,  George  van,  501 
Paris,  University  of,  283,  350;  Nicolas  Cop's 

Rectorial  address  to,  285,  3.54;    Parliament 

of  (1521),  proclamation  of,  283;  (1542),  and 

the  Protestants,  288;  the  Placards  of,  286; 

Edict  of  (1543),  288 
Parker,  Matthew,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

571  sq.,  576,  597 
Parliament  of  Paris  (1521),  proclamation  of, 

283;  (1542),  and  the  Protestants,  288 
Parma,  80-7;  siege  of  (1521),  44 
Parpaglia,  Vincent,  impal  Nuncio,  587  sq. 
Parr,  Catharine,  Queen  of  Henry  VIII,  457, 

488 
Parrasio,  Gianpaolo,  16 
Pascal,  Blaise,  711 
Pascual,  Mateo,  401 
Pasquier-Brouet,  652  sqq. 
Passau,  conference  of  (1552),  272;   treaty  of 

(1.552),  277 
Pastor  Aeternns,  the  Bull  (1516),  31 
Patrizzi,  Francesco,  707 
Paul  III,  Pope  (Alessandro  Farnese),  21,  32, 

69  sqq.,  80,  83,  85,  2.33  sqq.,  249,  251,  255,260, 

379,  385,  414,  444,  642-4,  660-70 
Paul  IV,  Pope  (Giovanni   Piero  Caraffa),  33, 

89-92,  379,  381  sq.,  534,  545  sqq.,   564,   636, 

648,  652-6,  673  sq.;  his  Index  Lihrorum  Pro- 

Mbitorvm,  687 
Pauvan,  Jacques,  death  of,  284 
Pavia,  campaign  of  (1525),  23,  50  sq.,  423  sq. 
Paz,  Duarte  de,  413 
Peorl  of  the  Passion,  the,  107 


Peasants'  Revolt,  the,  in  Germany  (1524), 
175-194,  715 

Peckham,  Sir  Henry,  544 

Pedersen,  Christian,  610 

Pedersson,  Gebel,  Bishop-elect  of  Bergen,  620 

Pedro  di  Toledo,  Viceroy  of  Naples,  70  sq. 

Pellican,  Conrad,  161,  356 

Pembroke,  William  Herbert,  Earl  of,  475, 
505  sq. 

Penance,  Sacrament  of,  125,  672 

Penances,  124  sq. 

Pepin,  Guillaume,  280 

Percy,  Heniy,  Lord,  559 

Perez,  Juan,  his  Spanish  New  Testament,  406, 
411 

Pergola,  Bartolommeo  della,  386 

Peronne,  siege  of  (1536) ,  71 

Perpignau,  76 

Perrenot  de  Chantonnay,  Thomas,  302 

Persecution,  of  "sectaries,"  in  Germany,  224; 
of  Protestants,  in  France,  289  sq.,  293  sq., 
347;  in  England,  501,  5.3.3,  538  sqq. 

Perugia,  revolt  of  (1540),  75 

Peruzzi,  Baltasar,  12 

Pescara,  Marquis  of,  23  sq.,  44,  48  sq.,  52 

Pesth,  siege  of  (1542),  242 

Peter  Martyr,  see  Vermigli,  Pietro  Martire 

Peto,  William,  438,  546 

Petre,  Sir  William,  acts  as  deputy  for  Crom- 
well, 445;  480,495,525 

Petri,  Olaus  and  Laurentius  (Olaf  and  Lars 
Petersson).  624-30 

Petrucci,  Cardinal,  14 

Peutinger,  Conrad,  29 

Pfefferkorn,  Johann,  696 

Pfeffinger,  Dr,  122 

Pfeiffer,  Heinrich,  186-9 

Pflug,  Julius  von.  Bishop  of  Naumburg.  240, 
242,  264,  667 

Pfyffer,  Ludwig,  .341 

Philip  II,  King  of  Spain,  75,  90  sqq.,  244,  267, 
409,  566,  574,  578  sq. ;  his  and  Mary's  reign 
in  England,  chap,  xv,  passim;  and  the 
Council  of  Trent,  675  sqq. 

Philip  the  Fair,  Duke  of  Burgundy,  36 

Philippeville,  89,  102 

Philosophy,  in  the  Age  of  the  Reformation, 
chap.  XIX,  passim 

Philpot,  John,  539 

Piacenza,  44,  .'56,  80-5;  murder  of  Pierluigi 
Farnese  at,  83 

Pico  della  Mirandola,  Galeotto,  72,  387 

Pico  della  Mirandola,  Giovanni,  4,  7,  16,  .308, 
702;  his  Oratio  de  Reformandis  Moribus, 
31 ;  his  character  and  achievements,  695 

Piedmont,  62,  73,  89,  94 

Piero  di  Sacco,  Alessandro  da,  381 

Pighino,  Archbishop  of  Siponto,  671 

Pighius,  Albert,  667,  717 

Pilgrimage  of  Grace,  the,  446 

Pindar,  first  Greek  book  printed  at  Rome,  17 

Pinerolo,  73,  94 

Pinkie,  battle  of  (1547),  487,  556 


Index 


851 


Pio,  Alberto,  16 

Piombino,  84,  88 

Pirates  of  Algiers,  the,  68  sq. 

Pirkheimer,  Wilibald,  138,  160,  168,  698 

Pisa,  council  of  (1511),  29 

Pistoris,  Maternus,  111 

Pius  II,  Pope  (Aeneas  Silvius  Piccolomini),  29, 
355 

Pius  IV,  Pope  (Giovanni  Angelo  de'  Medici), 
578  sq.,  656,  671-87 

Pius  V,  Pope  (Michele  Ghislieri),  33,  397,  410, 
656,  687 

Pizarro,  Fernando,  Francisco,  and  Gonzalo, 
101 

Placards  of  Paris,  the,  286 

Planitz,  H.  von  der,  170 

Plato,  701  sq. 

Platonism,  introduction  of,  into  Florence,  4; 
the  Platonists,  ih.,  702 

Platter,  Thomas,  355 

Plethon,  Geraistos,  701 

Podiebrad,  George,  King  of  Bohemia,  198 

Poissy,  Colloquy  of  (1561),  302 

Poitiers,  Diane  de,  97,  98;  and  the  Guises,  296 

Poland,  Italian  Reformers  in,  393;  the  Refor- 
mation in,  634-8 

Pole,  Reginald,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  33, 
85,  239,  379,398  sq.,  447  sqq.,  501,  518-46,  641, 
660-8 

Pole,  Sir  Geoffrey,  449 

Polenz,  George  von.  Bishop  of  Samland,  1(50, 
162 

Polish  Prussia,  the  Reform  in,  635 

Politian  (Angelo  Ambrogio  de  Poliziano),  16, 
701 

Pomerania,  George  and  Baruim,  Dukes  of, 
170 

Pomponazzi,  Pietro,  4,  702  sqq. 

Ponet,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  501  sq. 

Pontano,  G.  G.,  16 

Poor  Laws,  English,  469 

Porta,  Egidio  della,  381 

Porto,  Francesco,  384  sq. 

Portugal,  social  condition  of,  and  the  Inquisi- 
tion in,  412-5 

Porzio,  16 

Posse vin,  Antony,  631 

Potenza,  Giovanni  Francesco  di,  607 

Poyet,  Guillaume,  288 

Pragmatic  Sanction,  the  (1438),  29,  31,  32,  281 ; 
(1548),  102 

Praise  of  Folly,  by  Erasmus,  280 

Predestination,  philosophy  of,  717 

Presbyterianism  and  Episcopalianism,  in  Scot- 
land, 593 

Prisidiaux,  the,  in  France,  96 

Pressburg,  Ferdinand  elected  King  of  Hun- 
gary at,  199 

Prevost-Paradol,  L.  A.,  712 

Prierias,  see  Mazzolini 

Princes,  the  German,  growth  of  their  power, 
150  sq. ;  Reformation  in  alliance  with,  194 

Printing-press,    established    in    Worms    by 


Luther's   friends,  139;    Greek,   established 

at  Verona,  23;  in  Germany,  111 
Priuli,  Luigi,  379,  398 
Privy  Council,  of  Edward  VI,  its  composition, 

475 
Privy  Six  (Heiirdiche  Rath),  in  Zurich,  322 
Protest,  the,  against  decisions  of  the  Diet  of 

Speier,  204  sq. 
Protestant  Synod,  French  (1559),  295 
Protestants,    persecution    of,    in    Germany, 

224;    in    France,   289  sq.,   293  sq.,  347;   in 

England,  501,  533,  538  sqq. ;  the  original, 

205,  211 
Provence,  invasion  of  (1536),  71 
Prussia,  Albrecht,  Duke  of,  198,  270 
Psalms,  English  metrical  version  of  the,  482 
Publicius,  Jacob,  111 
Pucci,  Antonio,  Cardinal,  30,  413 
Pucci,  Lorenzo,  Cardinal,  413 
Puritanism,  beginnings  of,  592 
Puritans,  the,  and  the  English  Church,  597 
Puteo,  Jacopo,  676  sqq. 

Quart  du  sel,  in  France,  96 
Querno,  Camillo,  18 
Quignon,  Cardinal,  Breviary  of,  484 
Quintaua,  Juan  de,  411 

Rabelais, Fran9ois,6iX), 710 sq.;  his  Gargantua, 
287 

Radstadt,  siege  of  (1526),  190  sq. 

Raffaelle,  Sanzio,  6  sq.,  8,  12,  13,  14,  22,  28 

Ragnone,  Lattanzio,  390 

Raimimd,  Cardinal,  112 

Randolph,  Sir  Thomas,  580 

Rangone,  Countess  Giulia,  384 

Rantzau,  Johann, 230 

Ranzau,  Hans,  615 

Rastell,  AVilliam,  501 

Ratisbon,  238;  conferences  of  (1524),  172; 
(1526),  326;  Diets  of  (1532),  218;  (154<]), 
2.53;  Religious  Colloquy  of  (1541),  33,  75, 
240,  (>45 

Rectorial  address,  Nicolas  Cop's,  to  the  Uni- 
versity of  Paris,  354 

Red  Book  of  Sweden,  the  (Roda  Boken),  630, 
632 

Reff,  Hans,  Bishop  of  Oslo,  620 

Reformatio  Legum  Ecclesiasticarum,  the,  508, 
589 

Reformation,  early  ideas  of  and  demand  for 
a,  2,  29;  the,  in  the  16th  century,  its 
birth  and  growth,  104;  in  Germany,  25  sq., 
158  sq.,  chaps,  iv-viii,  passim;  in  Geneva, 
362;  in  Italy,  378-99;  in  Spain,  399-412; 
in  Portugal,  412-15;  in  France,  chap,  ix, 
passim,  346-9;  in  Switzerland,  chap,  x, 
passim,  216,  362;  in  England,  chaps,  xiii- 
XV,  passion;  the  Scottish,  and  the  Anglican 
settlement,  chap,  xvi,  passim;  in  Denmark, 
602-17;  in  Norway  and  Iceland,  617-21; 
in  Sweden,  621-33;  in  Poland,  6.34-8;  its 
counexiou   with   the    Peasants'    Revolt   in 


852 


Index 


Germany,  175;  European  Thought  in  Age 
of,  chap.  XIX,  passim ;  and  the  Renaissance, 
connexion  and  distinctions  between,  282, 
691. 

Reformation  Parliament,  the  English  (1559), 
566  sqq.;  the  Scottish  (1560),  579 

Reformed  Church,  the,  and  Calvin,  chap,  xr, 
passim;  doctrines,  spread  of,  in  Germany, 
160;  ministry,  the,  and  Calvin,  370  sqq. 

Reformers,  German,  160  sqq.,  168,  362; 
French,  282  sqq. ;  Genevan,  362 ;  Italian, 
393,  637 ;  English,  538  sqq. ;  the  Catholic, 
chap,  xviii,  passim 

Regius,  Urbanus,  160,  183 

Reichskammergericht,  the,  149,  214,  217,  219, 
232 

Reichsregiment,  the,  149,  151,  170  sq. ;  revolt 
of  the  cities  against,  153;  failure  of,  156  sq. 

Reina,  Cassiodoro  de,  411 

Reinliard,  Anne,  marries  Zwingli,  313 

Reinhard,  Martin,  606 

Religious  associations  in  Germany,  108,  122; 
life,  popular,  in  Germany,  105;  revival,  in 
Germany,  106;  settlement,  the,  of  1559,  in 
England,  570  sq. 

Religious  Houses,  reform  of,  in  Spain,  400; 
suppression  of,  in  England,  444,  448,  450, 
467  sq. ;  spoliation  of,  in  Norway,  618 

Religious  Orders,  the,  and  the  Counter- 
Reformation,  646-9 

Re'ly,  Jean  de,  Bible  of,  283 

Renaissance,  the :  in  Italy,  chap,  i,  passim,, 
640,  700-10;  not  opposed  to  the  Catholic 
Church,  342;  its  effect  upon  European 
thought,  chap,  xix,  passim;  the  Latin 
700-10;  the  French,  282,  710-12;  the 
Teutonic,  712-18;  and  Reformation,  con- 
nexion and  distinctions  between,  282, 
691 

Renard,  Simon,  513  sqq. 

Renee,  Princess  of  France,  Duchess  of 
Ferrara,   358,   384  sqq.,  528,  578 

Reuchlin,  John,  695;  his  De  Rudimentis 
Hebraicis,  6tt6 

Reumont,  Alfred  von,  .33 

Reutlingeu,  205 

Revenue,  in  France,  reform  of,  96;  Spanish 
colonial,  101 ;  of  the  Papal  States,  under 
Pope  Paul  IV,  91 

Revolution,  the  Genevan  (1530),  362;  English 
(1549),  494  sqq. ;  (1551),  504  sq. 

Revolutionary  movements,  in  Germany  and 
the  Netherlands,  222  sqq. 

Reyna,  Casiodoro  de,  592 

Reynolds,  Dr,  442 

Rhegius,  see  Regius 

Khenanus,  Beatus,  313 

Riario,  Raffaelle,  Cardinal,  8,  15,  17 

Ricci,  Paolo,  386 

Rice  ap  Griffith.  471 

Rich,  Richard,  Lord,  475,  506 

Richmond,  Duke  of  (bastard  son  of  Henry 
VIII),427,  445,  470 


Ridley,  Nicholas,  Bishop  of  London,  484,  501, 

503,  508,  521,  538-41 
Rincon,  Antonio,  murder  of,  76 
Rink,  Melchior,  624 
Rio  di  Carpi,  Alberto,  15 
Ritterschaft,  the  German,  154 
Robsart,  Amy,  death  of,  582 
Robortello,  Francesco,  391 
Rochester,  Sir  Robert,  525 
Rochford,  George,  Lord,  445 
Rodach,  conference  of,  206 
Rode,  Henne,  332 
Rodrigues,  Simao,  415,  652  sqq. 
Roemoud,  Florimoud  de,  296 
Roennov  (Bishop  of  Roskilde),  614,  616 
Rogers,  John,  5-33,  538 
Rohrbach,  Jacklein,  182  sq.,  187  sq.,  189 
Rojas,  Domingo  de,  407  sq.,  410 
Roma,  Jean  de,  289 
Romagna,  91 ;  Cesare  Borgia's  improvement 

of  the,  1 
Roman  law,  effect  of,  on  German  peasants, 

176 
Romano,  Francesco,  391 
Romano,  Giulio,  13 
Romano,  Paolo,  13 
Rome,  chap,  i,  passim ;  sack  of  (1527),  and  its 

consequences,  24,  55  sq.  ;  Luther  summoned 

to,  132;  Luther  at,  117  sq. ;  University  of, 

16  sq. 
Romorantin,  Edict  of  (1560).  298 
Roper,  JNIargaret,  443 
Rosenbliit,  Hans,  175 
Rosmini,  Carlo  de,  35 
Rossem,  Martin  van,  76,  242 
Rothenburg,  188,  190 
Rottman,  Bernard,  224  sq. 
Rouen,  bourse  started  at,  65 
Roussel,     Gerard,    Bishop    of    Oloron,    282, 

284  sq.,  287,  353 
Roussillon,  French  occupation  of,  76 
Roust,  Diethelm,  327 
Roust,  Marcus,  315,  318,  322 
Rovere,  Giuliano  della :  see  Julius  II,  Pope 
Rovere,  Giulio  della  (Austin  Friar),  382 
Rovere,  Lavinia  della,  384,  387 
Royal    Supremacy,    in    England,    436,    442, 

567  sqq. 
Rubeanus,  Crotus  (Johannes  Jager  of  Drou- 

theim),  111,696 
Rullo,  Donato,  398 

Sabinus,  Petrus,  17 

Sachs,  Hans,  his  Wittenbergische  Nachtigall, 

Sacraments:      of     Penance     and     Extreme 

Unction,  125,  672;   of  Orders,  680,  683;   of 

Matrimony,  683 
Sadler,  Sir  Ralph,  458,  574 
Sadoleto,    Jacopo,    Bishop    of     Carpentras, 

8,    15    sq.,    24,    30,    33,    379,    386,    397    sq., 

641  sqq. 
Sadolin,  Jorgen,  610,  613 


Index 


853 


Saint  Andre,  Mare'chal  de,  303 

Saint  Pol,  Count  of,  58  sq. 

Saint  Quentiu,  94 

Sainte  Marthe,  Charles  de,  292 

Salmeron,  Alfonso,  391 

Salisbury,  Margaret  Plantagenet,  Countess 
of,  449;  beheaded,  452 

Salmeron,  Alfonso,  652  sqq.,  G67,  671 

Saluzzo,  84,  94 

Saluzzo,  Marquis  of,  59 

Salzburg,  peasants'  revolt  in,  190 

Sam,  Conrad,  333 

Samson,  Bernardin,  313 

San  Juan,  Fernando  de,  406 

San  Roman,  Francisco  de,  403  sq. 

Sanchez,  Juan,  408 

Sanctae  Inquisitionis  artes  aliquot  detectae, 
the,  -106 

Sangallo,  Antonio,  12,  13 

Sannazaro,  Jacopo, 16 

Sansovino,  Andrea,  12,  13 

Sanuto,  Marino,  380 

Saravia,  Hadrian,  597 

Sarpi,  P.,  10,644 

Sastrow,  Bartholomew,  262 

Saunier,  Antoiue,  372 

Savonarola.  Girolamo,  attitude  of,  towards 
the  Renaissance,  3  sq. 

Savoy,  62,  73,  89,  94;  French  conquest  of 
(153(5),  70;  House  of,  and  Geneva,  358-62; 
Charles  HI,  Duke  of,  60,  73;  Emmanuel 
Philibert,  Duke  of,  89,  92 

Saxony,  237,  252,  257;  Maurice,  Duke  of, 
241  sqq.,  252-75;  George,  Duke  of,  135, 
148,  163-252;  John,  Elector  of,  169,  186, 
189,  205;  John  Frederick  (the  Magnani- 
mous), Elector  of,  233-86;  Henry,  Duke 
of,  237  sq.,  252  ;  Augustus,  Elector  of, 
275  sq. 

Scaliger,  Joseph,  718 

Schappeler,  Christoph,  German  reformer,  160, 
177,  179 

Schartlin  zu  Burtenbach,  S.,  255,  sq.,  270 

Schaumburg,  Adolf,  Count  of,  259 

Schelling,  Friedrich  Wilhelm  von,  714 

Schenk,  Burchard  von,  380 

Scheurl,  Christoph  (German  jurist),  134 

Schinner,  Matthaus,  Cardinal  of  Sion,  309 

Schmalkalden,  League  of,  26,  215  sqq.,  232- 
43,  252-8 

Schmalkaldic  War,  the  (1546),  256  sq. 

Schmid,  Felix,  322 

Schnepf  (German  reformer),  234,  265 

Scholarship,  Catholic,  revival  of,  688;  Pro- 
testant, 718 

Scholasticism,  the  new,  704  sq. 

Schomberg,  Nicholas  von.  Archbishop  of 
Capua,  23,  423,  642  sq. 

School  of  AtliPM)^,  the,  7 

Schurf,  Jerome,  117 

Schwabach,  conference  at  (1530),  209  sq. 

Schwendi,  Lazarus,  272 

Schwerin,  Henry,  Count  of,  599 


Scioppius,  Caspar,  708 

Scory,  John,  Bishop  of  Chichester,  502,  521 

Scotland,  and  England,  419-22,  453-62,   548; 

attempted  union  of  (1547),  487;  and  France, 

499,  574  sqq. ;    the  Reformation   in,  chap. 

XVI,  passim;  Scottish  rebellion,  the  (1559), 

572  sq. 
Scripture  and  tradition,  authority  of,  665  sq. 
Scriptures,  Luther's  attitude  towards  the,  164 
Sculpture,  under  Pope  Leo  X,  13;  decadence 

of,  28 
Sects,  growth  of,  in  Germany,  223 ;  persecu- 
tion of,  224 
Secular    control  of    religion  and  charity  in 

Germany,  108 
Seehaufen,  the, 179 
Seguier,  Pierre,  294 
Senarcleus,  Louis  and  Claud  de,  403 
Septuagiut,  Roman  edition  of  the,  688 
Seripando,  Girolamo,  Cardinal,  667  sq.,  676- 

82 
Serveto  y  Reves,  Miguel,  .375,  411  sq.,  716 
Service-books,  destruction  of,  in  England,  503; 

Swedish  service-book  (£en  Handbock  pad 

Sivensko),  628 
Servicio,  the,  in  Spain,  !)9 
Seso,  Carlos  de,  407  sq. 
Sessa,  Duke  of,  21 
Seville,  the  Reform  at,  404-7 
Sextus  Empiricus,  712 

Seymour,  Jane,  Queen  of  Henry  VIH,  445,  448 
Seymour,  Sir  John,  445 
Seymour,  Thomas,  Baron,  Lord  High  Admiral, 

242,  475,  488 
Sforza,  Francesco,  Duke  of  Milan,  43-60,  69, 

232 
Sforza,  Massimiliano,  Duke  of  Milan,  308 
Sharington,  Sir  William,  488 
Sheffield,  Edmund,  Lord,  475 
Ship  of  Fools,  by  Sebastian  Brant,  280 
Shrewsbury,  Francis  Talbot,  Earl  of,  420 
Sicily,  visited  by  Emperor  Charles  V,  70 
Sickingen,  Franz  von,  41,  43.  1.14  sqq. 
Siena,  83;   revolt  and  conquest  of   (1552-5), 

88 
Sievershausen,  battle  of  (1553),  275 
Sigbrit,  Mother,  604 
Sigismund  I,  King  of  Poland ,  198,  635 
Sigismund  II  Augustus,  King  of  Poland,  270, 

635  sq. 
Sigismund  IH,  King  of  Poland  and  Sweden, 

632 
Silva,  Diogo  da,  413 
Simon,  Bishop  of  Modena,  30 
Simonetta.  Luigi,  (576  sqq. 
Slnapius.  Johann  and  Kilian,  384 
Sistine  Chapel,  the,  Michelangelo's  decoration 

of,  6,  14,  34 
Sittich,  Mark,  of  Ems,  329 
Six  Articles,  Act  of  the  (1539),  450,  466  s-., 

477 
Sixtus  IV,  Pope  (F.  d'AlbescoUa  della  Roverc), 

686 


854 


Index 


Sixtus  V,  Pope  (F.  Peretti),  650,  686  sqq. 

Skefiangton,  Sir  William,  442 

Skelton,  John,  423 

Skodborg,  Jurgeu,  GIO 

Skram,  Peder  {Daninarks  Vovehals),  230,  615 

Slaghoek,  Diederik,  Archbishop-elect  of  Luud, 
603  sqq.,  607,  610 

Smeton,  Mark,  445 

Smith,  Dr  Richard,  501 

Smith,  Sir  Thomas.  484,  495  sq. 

Social  Revolution,  in  Germany,  174-194;  in 
Switzerland,  318;  in  England,  489  sqq. 

Socinians,  the,  638 

Soderini,  Francesco,  22 

Sol  way  Moss,  battle  of  the  (1542),  456 

Solyman  II,  Sultan  of  Turkey,  67  sqq.,  77, 
207,  218,  242 

Somerset,  Edward  Seymour  (Earl  of  Hert- 
ford), Duke  of,  Protector,  475-96,  504-7, 
512,  556 

Sommario  delta  Santa  Scrittura,  the,  386 

Soranzo,  Giacomo,  513,  529 

Soranzo,  Vittorio,  Bishop  of  Bergamo,  390, 
398 

Sorbonne,  the,  and  the  Meaux  preachers,  283 ; 
and  Calvin's  Institutio,  288 

Soriano,  Antonio,  26 

Soto,  Domenico  de,  250 

Soto,  Pedro  de,  402,  541 

Si>ubise,  Madame  de,  384 

Southampton,  Thomas  Wriothesley,  Earl  of, 
475  sq.,  488,  494,  497  sq. 

Southwell,  Earl  of,  497  sq. 

Sozzini,  Lelio  and  Fausto,  393,  637  sq., 
716 

Spain,  resources  of,  63;  the  government  of, 
99 ;  internal  developments  of,  99  sqq. ;  in- 
dustries of,  under  Charles  V,  100 ;  problem 
of  her  decline,  100;  the  Reformation  in,  .399- 
412;  reception  of  Erasmus'  writings  in,  400 
sq. ;  her  successes  in  Italy  and  France  (1557), 
547 

Spalatinus  (George  Burkhardt  of  Spelt),  111, 
132 

Sparre,  Aage,  610 

Speier,  congress  of  cities  at  (1523),  153;  Coun- 
cil of  (1524),  173;  Diets  of  (1526),  196; 
(1529),  203  sq.,  330;  (1544),  77,  244,  661; 
Recess  of  (1526),  199,  203  sq. ;  secret  under- 
standing of  Lutheran  Princes  at  (1529),  204, 
206 

Speng,  Jakob, 403  sq. 

Speiigler  ((larman  reformer),  138 

Speziale,  I'ietro,  his  De  Gratia  Dei,  380 

Spiera,  Francesco,  394  sq. 

Spinoza,  Baruch,  691,  708  sqq. 

Spiritual  Exercises,  Ignatius  Loyola's,  657 
sq. 

St  Angelo,  castle  of,  Pope  Clement  VII  takes 
refuge  in,  24,  54 

St  Anne,  cult  of,  107 

St  Augustine,  707,  712  sq. ;  Rule  of,  114;  Cal- 
vin's relation  to,  365 


St  Dizier,  siege  of  (1544),  78 

St  Elizabeth,  Queen  of  Hungary,  110 

St  Francis  of  Assisi,  2 

StGallen,  205,  331 

St  Germain,  Conference  of  (1562),  303 

St  John  of  Jerusalem,  Military  Order  of,  60, 

69,  451 
St  John  of  the  Cross,  409 
St  John,  Lord,  see  Wiltshire,  Earl  of 
St  Paul,  712  sq. 
St  Peter's,  Rome,  rebuilt  by  Pope  Julius  II,  its 

architectural  symbolism,  6 
St  Quentin,  battle  of  (1557),  92;  surrender  of 

(1557),  547 
St  Teresa,  409 

St  Ursula's  Schifflein,  in  Germany,  108,  122 
Stadt,  Carl,  333 

Stalford,  Thomas,  rebellion  of  (15^7),  546 
Stagefiihr,  Dr,  613 
Stancari,  Francesco,  637 
Standish,  Bishop  of  St  Asaph,  431 
Stanza  della  Seynatura,  the,  wall-paintings 

of,  14 
Starkey,  Thomas,  490 
States-General  of  the  Netherlands,   the,   74, 

102 
Staupitz,  Johann  von,  his  influence  on  Luther, 

115;  117  sq.,  168 
Stein,  Albrecht  von,  315 
Stein,  Heynlin  von,  168 
Sternhold,  Thomas,  his  metrical  version  of  the 

Psalms,  482 
Stewart,  James,  Lord,  see  Moray,  Earl  of 
Stockholm  Bath  of  Blood,  the  (1520),  604 
Stokesley,  Dr,  Bishop  of  Loudon,  433 
Storch,  Nicolaus,  166 
Story,  Dr  John,  474,  585 
Strassburg,  87,  160,  205,  328  sq. 
Strauss,  Jacob,  1(;0,  183,  697 
Strenguas,  Diet  of  (1523),  622 
Strozzi,  Filippo,  26,  72 
Strozzi,  Piero,  77  sq.,  88 
Stiibner,  Marcus,  166 

Stiihlingen,  peasants'  rising  at  (1524),  177  sq. 
Stuhlweissenburg,  coronation  of  John  Zapolya 

at,  198,  and  of  Ferdinand  I,  199 
Stuniga,  Diego  Lopez  de,  400,  699 
Sture,  Sten  (the  younger),  601,  603 
Sture,  Svante,  603 
Sturm,  Jacob,  204,  258 
Sturm,  John,  286 
Sturzl,  Jacob,  329 
Stuttgart,  siege  of  (1525),  181 
Styfel,  M.,  German  reformer,  160 
Styria,  150 

Subject  Lands,  the,  in  Switzerland,  324 
"  Submission    of    the    Clergy,"    in    England 

(1532),  438 
Subsidy,  demanded  by  Heni-y  VIII,  421 
Suffolk,  Charles  Brandon,  Duke  of,  47, 421  sq., 

446,  560 
Suffolk,  Henry    Grey   (Marquis    of    Dorset), 

Duke  of,  505,  514  sqq.,  526,  528 


Index 


855 


Suffolk,  Richard  de  la  Pole,  Duke  of  ("  White 

Rose"),  426 
Sulz,  Couut  Rudolf  von,  329 
Summa  Doctrinae  Christianae,  by  Canisius, 

682 
Supernae  dlspositio7iis  arbitrio,  the  bull,  31 
Supremacy,  Royal,  in  England,  436;  Acts  of 

(1534),  442;  (1559),  567  sqq. 
Surian,  Michiel,  373,  547 

Surrey,  Henry  Howard,  Earl  of,  executed,  462 
Surrey,  Thomas  Howard,  Earl  of  (afterwards 

Duke  of  Norfolk),  45,  420,  471 
Swabian  League,  the,  41,  146,  15G,  181,  224 
Sweden,  early  history  of,  599  sqq.;  conquest 

of   (1520),  603;    the  Reformation    m,  621- 

33 
Swiss  Confederation,  the,  306,  320,  324,  341; 

mercenaries  in   the   French    and    Imperial 

armies,  44  sq. 
Switzerland,   Austria's   policy  towards,  329; 

Italian  Reformers  in,  393;  the  Reformation 

in,  216,  chap,  x,  passim 

Taborites,  the,  186 

Tacitus,  writings  of,  published,  16 

Taille,  the,  in  France,  96 

Tassoni  (il  Vecchio),  386 

Tast,  Hermann,  160,  611 

Tausen,  Hans  (the  "  Danish  Luther"), 609-16; 

his  Confession  of  Faith,  613,  617 
Taxation,  oppressive  English,  470 
Taylor,  Rowland,  539 
Telesio,  Bernardino,  706 
Ten  Articles,  the,  446 
Termes,  Marechal  de,  93 
Te'rouaune,  French  capitulation  of  (1553),  89; 

recovered,  94 
Tetrapolltana,  the,  212,  335  sq. 
Tetzel,  John,  121,  130,  134,  204 
Teutonic  Renaissance,  the,  712-18 
Teutons,  the,  contrasted   intellectually  with 

the  Latins,  692  sq. 
Theatines,  Order  of,  23,  379,  648 
Theology,  Calvin's,  363  sqq. 
Thesaurus  linguae   Graecae,  by  Guarino  di 

Favera,  17 
Theses,    Luther's    ninety-five,    123,    128-32; 

Zwingli's  sixty-seven,  321;  ten,  by  Zwingli, 

Haller,  and  Roll,  327 
Thiene,  Count  Gaetano  da,  23,  379,  648 
Thionville,  capture  of  (1558),  93 
Thirlby,  Bishop  of  Ely,  475,  484,  502,  513,  543 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  the,  587  sq. 
Thomas,  William,  528 
Thorkildsson,  Olaf,  Bishop  of  Bergen,  618 
Throckmorton,  Sir  Nicholas,  544,  573  sqq. 
Tillet,  Louis  du,  358 

Tithes,  agitation  against,  in  Switzerland,  323 
Toledo.  Juan  de,  Cardinal,  85,  88 
Toul,  87;  French  occupation  of,  144 
Toulon,  Christian  slaves  sold  at,  77 
Toulouse,  bourse  started  at,  65 ;  edicts  of  (1538- 

42),  288 


Tournay,  44,  102 

Tournon,  Cardinal  de,  97,  288-93 

Trade,  Spanish,  rise  and  decline  of,  100  sq. 

Tradition,  and  Scripture,  authority  of,  665  sq. 

Translations  of  the  Bible:  Luther's  German, 

164;  French  (by  Lefevre  d'Etaples  and  by 

Jean  de  Rely),  283;  Brucioli's  Italian,  383; 

English,  464  sqq. ;  Spanish,  402,  406,  411 
Transylvania,  Unitarian  Church  in,  393 
Treason  Act,  the  (1549),  496  sq. 
Treasury  of  merits,  the,  124  sq. 
Tremellius,  Emmanuel,  391,  477 
Trent,  Council  of  (1545-fi3),  661-84;  80-7,  94, 

249  sqq.,  394;  Queen  Elizabeth  and  the,  583, 

586  sq. 
Tr^sor  de  I'Epargne,  the,  64,  96 
Tridentine  Index,  the,  687 
Trier,  siege  of  (1522),  155 
Trinity  House,  origin  of,  472 
Tripoli,  given  to  the  Knights  of  St  John,  60, 

68;  Turkish  capture  of  (1551),  86 
Trissino,  Giangiorgio,  395 
Trithemius  (von  Trittenheim),  Johann,  29 
Trivulzio,  Agostino,  16 
Trivulzio,  Teodoro,  57 
Trolle,  Erik,  603 
TroUe,  Gustaf,  Archbishop  ol'  Upsala,  603  sq., 

614  sq.,  622  sq. 
Truchsess,   Georg  von  Waldburg,  general  of 

the  Swabian  League,  181  sq.,  189  sq. 
Trutvetter,  John,  112 
Tunis,  capture  of  (1535),  69 
Tunstall,  Cuthbert,  Bishop  of  Durham,  148, 

432,  448,  471,  482,  484,  501,  507,  521,  571 
Turin,  70  sqq.,  94 

Turini  da  Pescia,  Baldassare,  13, 16 
Turks,  the,  at  war  with  the  Papal  States,  86, 

88;  besiege  Vienna  (1529),  206  sq. ;  invasion 

of   (1532),   218;    defensive    league    against 

(1538),  73  .sq.;  conquer  Hungary  (1541),  242 
Tuscany,  Duke  of,  94 
Tyler,  Wat,  175 

Tyndale,  William,  his  New  Testament,  464  sq. 
Tyrol,  150 

Udall,  Nicholas,  his  edition  of  the  Paraphrase 

of  Erasmus,  481 
Udine,  Giovanni  da,  13 
Ulm,  161,  205 

Unam  Sanctum,  the  bull,  31 
Uniformity,  the  Second  Act  of  (1552),  507; 

the  Third  (1559),  569 
Uniformity  of  worship,  desire  for,  in  English 

Church,  483 
Unitarian  Church,  in  Transylvania,  393 
Universities:    Alcala,  400;    Cambridge,  468; 

Copenhagen,  605,  617;  Erfurt,  110;  Geneva, 

372  sq.;  Marburg,  201;  Oxford,  468;  Paris. 

283,  350;   Nicolas  Cop's  Rectorial  address 

to,  285,  354;  Rome,  foundation  of,  16  sq. ; 

Wittenberg,  Luther  at,  116  sqq. 
Upper  Swabia,  spread  of  Reformed  doctrines 

in,  1(>0 


856 


///  d'^j: 


Upsala.  ba-Ie  •::  1 1-520},  60S:  Cotmcil  of  (Tjo- 

iolj  m  'J : '      i  Z'v3 ) ,  632 
Urban  II.  Pete  -Eudes),  126 
Urbino,  Francesco  ilaria.  Dake  of.  53  sq.,  56, 

69 
Ume,  La^e.  Bishop  of  RoskiWe,  609,  613 
rtenhove,  Charles.  477,  592 
Utopia.  Sir  Thomas  ilore's,  183,  ^ffiO 
Utrecht,  expulsion  of  Bishop  of,  102 
Cttenheim,  Christopher  Ton,  Bishop  of  Basel. 

324 

Vadian  (von  WaU),  315 

VaMemar  m  (Atterdag).  King  of  Tkmm»rk, 

600 
Yaldemar  the  Yictorioiis,  King  of  Denmark. 

599 
Yald^,  AlftHisD  de,  388 
VaW&,    Fernando    de    (Inqmsitor-Gaieral), 

■K6.  406  sq. 
Valdes.  Jean  de,  at  Xaples,  3S7  sqq. 
Valentino,  Bonifacio  and  FHippo,  387 
Valer,  Eodrigo  de,  4»:»4 
Valera,  Cipriano  de,  4C»),  411 
Yakrriano,  G.  P.  Bolzani.  1.5 
Valla,  Lorenzo,  his  inflnenee  on  the  Beformers. 

6% 
YaDadolid.  the  Beform  at.  407  sq. 
VaHe,  Andrea  della,  16 
Vannes,  Pe:er.  513,  526  sq. 
Vargas,  Dr,  4«]6 
Vargas,  JIartino  de,  399 
Vatable,  Francois,  2S2 
Vatican,  the.  Pope  Jolins   lis  eniargemeni 

and  decoration  of,  5  sq. 
Yaneelles.  trace  of  (1556),  S9-92,  544  sq. :  mp- 

tnreoC,9S 
Yandemont,  Loois,  Comte  de,  35 
Yaodemont,  Bene  de,  see  Lorraine 
Yanix,  Giovanni  Joaehino  Paasano,  Se^:iieiir 

de,  423  sqq. 
Vega,  GarciIa.sso  della.  91 
Vela,  Pedro  Monez,  4»>4 
Vendome.  Antcine.  Dnke  of,  76 
Venice,  60;  and  dte  Mediterranean  war,  72: 

the  Befcrm  at,  381-4 
Verdnn,  ST:  French  occnpatifRi  of,  144 
Vergara,  Jnan  de,  400  sq. 
Vergerio,  Giambattista,  Bishop  of  Pola,  394 
Vergerio,  Fierpaolo,  Bishop  of  Capo  d'Istria, 

233,  394  sq.,  .5S8 
Vermigli.  Pierro  ilartire  (Peter  Martyr),  302, 

390  sqq.,  477.  -502  sq.,  508 
Veron,  Jean,  477 
Verona,  Greek  printing-press  established  at, 

23 
Vesteris.    Met   of    (1527),    625:    Becess   of, 

636;   Ordinances  of  (Vestera^  Ordinantia), 

ib. 
Vestiarian  controTersy,  the,  590 
Vettori,  Francesco,  22,  26 
Yib^a,  LeoDor  de,  407  sq. 
Viborg,  Jens,  618 


Vida,  ilareo  G.,  15 

Vienna,  siege  of  '152S«),  207 

Yillalar,  battle  of  (1521),  -^ 

YiUanaoTa,  94 

Vfflers-Cotterets,  Edict  of  (1339),  96 

Yinei,  Leonardo  da,  13,  14 

Yio,  Tommaso  de,  *ec  Cajeian,  Cardinal 

Viret,  Pierre.  293,  358 

Virgin,  colt  of  the,  VKI :  ootrase  on  statne  of, 

at  Paris,  2*4,  "291 
Vira^,  Alonso  de.  -K)l 
Viseonti,  Carlo.  Bishop  of  Yentimiglia,  679 
Visitat.i-b'ig,  by  Peder  Plade,  616 
Ylacich.  3Iattia  OL  Flacins  Illyrieiis),  -383 
Vc^elsberger.  Sebastian.  358 
Vossiiis,  Gerani  Jan.  718 
Voysey,  Bishop  of  Exeter,  -301 
VoJgate,  the  Latin,  666 

Wakeman,  Bishop  of  Hereford,  467 
WaWeck.  Coont  Franz  ron.  Bishop  of  Mon- 
ster, 224,  244 
Waldenses,  massacre  of  the,  2S9  3q. 
WaldMrch,  Prorost  of,  303 
Waldmann,  Hans.  311  sq. 
Waldo,  Peter,  289 
Waldshnt,  rerolt  of  (1524),  178 
Wales,  471 
Wal/art   und   Stra*se   zh   8ant   Jatxit,  die., 

106 
Wallop,  Sir  J<dm,  457 
Wariiam.  WiDiam.  Archbishop  of  Canterfonry. 

428,  436.  439 
Wark  Castle,  siege  of  (1523),  422 
Warwick,  Ambrose  Dndley,  Earl  of,  584 
Warwick,  John   Dudley,  Earl    of,  458,  473, 

4.S1.   49S-o<B:    *e«    Xorthnmbedand,  Doke 

of 
Wattli,  Melchior.  -316 
Wehe,  Jacob,  181  sq. 
Weigant  (peasant  revolutionist),  184 
Weimar,  treaty  of  (1528),  202 
WeJLsberg,  massacre  of  (1525),  187;  desbnc- 

tion  of.  1^ 
Wentworth,  Thomas.  Baron,  ^9 
Werdenberg,  Connt  Felii  Ton,  190 
WesseL  John,  111 
W^tminster,    conference    of    (1527).   56  sq.: 

ooDoqny  of  fl.5o9^  .368 
Wharton,  Sir  Thomas,  4.»  sq.,  514 
Whiigiit.  John.   Archbishop  of  Canterfonry. 

161,  592,  597 
Wiclif.  John.  175:   his  i)^  Ecdtfia,  313:   his 

Bible.  464 
Wied.  Hermann  ron.  Archbishop  and  Ele  tor 

of  Cologne.  243  sq.,  251,  239,  6S2 
William  IIL  Doke  of  BaTaria,  251 
WOlock,  Jtrim,  ••  Superintendent "  of  Glasgow. 

591 
Wilson,  Dr,  443  sq. 
Wilton.  Lord  Grey  de,  505  sq. 
WUishire,  St  John.  Earl  of,  499;  <ee  Windkes- 

ter,  Marqui«  of 


Index 


857 


Wiltshire,  Thomas  Boleyn,  Earl  of,  429,  433 
sq.,  445 

Wimpheling,  Jakob,  29,  160;  his  Gravamina 
Germanicae  Nutionis,  29 

Wimpina,  Conrad,  130 

WiDchester,  William  Paulet  (Lord  St  John), 
Marquis  of,  505 

Windsheim,  205 

Windsor,  treaty  of  (1522),  45 

Wiugfield,  Sir  Anthony,  496,  499 

Winter,  William,  576 

Wishart,  George,  461,  556 

Wissenberg,  205 

Withers,  George,  506 

Wittenberg,  Luther's  Theses  nailed  to  door  of 
Castle  Church  of,  123;  Concord  of  (1536), 
234,  339;  capitulation  of  (1547),  261;  Uni- 
versity of,  Luther  at,  116  sqq.,  and  the  re- 
forming movement,  165  sq. ;  Luther  returns 
to,  167 

•'Wittenberg  Reformation,"  the,  250 

Wladislav  II,  King  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia, 
198 

Wolfe,  David,  583 

Wolflin,  Heinrich  (Lupulus),  307 

Wolmar,  Melchior,  291,  .351  sq. 

Wolsey,  Cardinal,  22,  42-5,  147,  416-35;  his 
colleges,  434 

Worms,  Diet  of  (1521),  139,  146  sq.,  170;  its 
Edict,  158,  166,  171 ;  Luther  at  the,  139  sq. ; 
reforms  instituted  at  the,  149;  Diet  of  (1540), 
Vergerio's  oration  at,  394 ;  religious  confer- 
ence of  (1540),  239;  Diet  of  (1545),  80,  662; 
printing-press  established  in,  by  Luther's 
friends,  1-39;  statue  of  Luther  at,  208 

Wotton,  Dr  Nicholas,  496,  513,  526,  530,  571 

Wriothesley,  Thomas,  see  Southampton,  Earl 
of 

Wrisberg,  Christopher  von,  251 

Wullenwever,  Jiirgen,  Burgomaster  of  Liibeck, 
228-31,  614  sq. 

Wiirttemberg,  Llrich,  Duke  of,  169,  177,  234, 


258,  323-35;  eviction  of,  41;  his  attempts 
to  regain  his  duchy,  146,  181 ;  his  restora- 
tion, 220  sq. 

Wurttemberg,  Christopher,  Duke  of,  220,  266, 
276.  587  sq. 

Wurzburg,  surrender  of  (1525),  190;  Bishop  of, 
attacked  by  the  peasants,  188 

Wyatt,  Sir  Thomas,  449,  518 ;  his  insurrection, 
527  sq. 

Wyttenbach,  Thomas,  307,  327 

Xavier,  St  Francis,  652 
Ximenez,  Cardinal,  399  sq.,  650 

Yorkshire,  conspiracy  in  (1541),  452 
Yuste,  Charles  V  retires  to,  90 

Zabem,  capture  of  (1525),  182 

Zamora,  Alfonso  de,  400 

Zanchi,  Girolamo,  391,  716 

Zapolya,  John,  King  of  Hungary,  198,  206  sq., 
236,  242 

Zapolya,  John  Sigismund,  242 

Zell,  Matthew,  160,  162 

Zerbold,  Gerard,  657 

Zevenbergen,  Maximilian  von,  145, 146 

Ziegler,  Jakob,  380 

Ziska,  John,  175 

Zodiacus  Vitae,  by  Angelo  Manzioli,  384 

Zurich,  chap,  x,  pansim ;  abolition  of  the  Mass 
at,  321 ;  Zwingli  at,  311  sq. ;  his  supremacy 
in.  322;  his  statue  at,  208 

ZutiJheu,  cession  of  county  of,  77 

Zwilling,  Gabriel,  161,  165,  167 

Zwingli,  Huldreich,  30&-41 ;  152,  179,  203, 
216,  698;  at  the  Conference  of  Marburg, 
207  sqq. ;  on  the  Confession  of  Augsburg, 
212;  his  relations  with  Luther  and  Eras- 
mus, 208,  313  sq.,  345  sq. ;  his  writings, 
.309-21 ;  his  sixty-seven  theses,  321 ;  his 
philcsophical  ideas,  713  sqq.;  his  statue  at 
Zurich,  208 


THE  CAMBRIDGE   MODERN 
HISTORY 

PLANNED   BY 
THE   LATE   LORD   ACTON,  LL.D. 

Regius  Professor  of  Modern  History  in  the  University  of  Cambridge 

EDITED  BY 

A.  W.  WARD,  Litt.D.,  G.  W.  PROTHERO,  Litt.D. 
and   STANLEY   LEATHES,    M.A. 

To  be  Complete  in  Twelve  Volumes,    Royal  8vo,  of  which    it    is    hoped  that 

two  can  be  issued  in  each  year.     These  volumes  will  appear 

in  two  Series  beginning  respectively  with 

Vol.  L   (The  Renaissance)  and  Vol.  VIL   (The  United  States) 


THE   SCOPE    OF   THE   WORK   AS    PROJECTED    WILL    INCLUDE 


I.  The  Renaissance 

II.  The  Reformation 
in.  The  Wars  of  Religions 
IV.  The  Thirty  Years'  War 

V.  Bourbons  and  Stuarts 
VI.  The  Eighteenth  Century 


VII.  The  United  States 
VIII.  The  French  Revolution 
IX.  Napoleon 

X.  Restoration  and  Reaction 
XI.  The  Growth  of  Nationalities 
XII.  The  Latest  Age 


"THERE  CAN  BE  NO  QUESTION  ABOUT  THE 
GREAT  VALUE  OF  THE  WORK;  IN  FACT, 
IT  IS  INVALUABLE  TO  EVERY  HISTORICAL 
STUDENT."— Public  Ledger,  Philadelphia    .    .    , 


THE  RENAISSANCE 

(Vol.  I.)  Royal  8vo,  $4.00,  net.  Car- 
riage, 30  cents. 

Contributing  Authors: 

The  late  Bishop  Creighton,  D.D.,  E.  J. 
Payne,  J.  B.  Bury,  Stanley  Leathes,  Ed= 
ward  Armstrong,  L.  A.  Burd,  Richard 
Garnett,  Horatio  Brown,  T.  F.  Tout,  Emit 
Reich,  H.  Butler  Clarke,  A.  W.  Ward, 
James  Gairdner,  Wm.  Cunningham,  Sir 
Richard  C.  Jebb,  M.  R.  James,  Wm.  Barry, 
Henry  Charles  Lea. 


THE  UNITED  STATES 

(Vol.  VII.)  Royal  8vo,  ^4.00,  net.  Car- 
riage, 30  cents. 

Contributing  Authors: 

John  A.  Doyle,  M.A.,  Miss  Mary  Bateson. 
A.  O.  Bradley,  Melville  M.  Bigelow,  J.  B. 
McMaster,  H,  W.  Wilson,  Woodrow  Wil= 
son,  John  G.  Nicolay,  John  Christopher 
Schwab,  Theodore  Clarke  Smith,  John  B. 
Moore,  Henry  Crosby  Emery,  Barrett 
Wendell.  With  complete  Bibliography,  Chrono- 
logical Table  of  Leading  Events,  and  Index. 


THE     REFORMATION     (Vol.  II.)    Royal  Svo,  $4.00,  net.    Carriage,  30  cents. 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

66   FIFTH   AVENUE,   NEW   YORK 

I 


HISTORY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
From  the  Compromise  of  1850 

By    JAMES    FORD    RHODES 
In  Four  Volumes.       Cloth.       8vo.       $10,00,  net 


"  It  is  the  one  work  now  within  reach  of  the  young  American  student  of  to-day  in  which 
he  may  learn  the  connected  story  of  the  great  battle  that  resulted  in  the  overthrow  of  slavery 
and  the  rededication  of  the  republic  to  unsullied  freedom.  In  no  other  publication  are  these 
facts  so  concisely,  so  fully,  and  so  well  presented,  and  the  student  who  makes  careful  study  of 
this  work  will  fully  understand,  not  only  the  actual  causes  which  led  to  the  war,  but  he  will 
know  how  gradually  they  were  developed  from  year  to  year  under  varying  political  power,  until 
the  nation  was  ripe  for  the  revolution.  .  .  .  Taking  the  work  all  together,  we  regard  it  as  the 
most  valuable  political  publication  of  the  age,  and  the  intelligent  citizen  who  does  not  become 
its  careful  student  must  do  himself  great  injustice." —  The  Times,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

"There  is  the  same  abundant  and  almost  exhaustive  collation  of  material,  the  same  sim- 
plicity and  directness  of  method,  the  same  good  judgment  in  the  selection  of  topics  for  full 
treatment  or  for  sketchy  notice,  the  same  calmness  of  temper  and  absence  of  passionate  partisan- 
ship. He  may  fairly  be  said  to  be  a  pupil  of  the  Gardiner  school,  and  to  have  made  the  great 
English  historian  a  model  in  subordinating  the  literary  element  to  the  judicial."  —  The  Nation. 


A  SHORT  HISTORY  OF  GERMANY 

By    ERNEST    R    HENDERSON 

A.B,  (Trinity),  M. A.  (Harvard),  Ph.D.  (Berlin) 
Author  ot  "A  History  of  Germany  la  the  Middle  Ages" 

In  Two  Volumes.         Cloth.         8vo.         $4.00,  net 

Vol.     I.      9  A.D.  to   1648  A.D. 
Vol.  II.      1648  A.D.   to   1871  A.D. 


"This  work  is  in  the  form  of  a  continuous  narrative,  unbroken  by  monographs  on  par- 
ticular institutions  or  phases  of  Germany's  development,  but  covering  the  whole  subject  with  a 
unity  of  treatment  such  as  has  seldom  been  attained  by  earlier  writers  in  the  same  field.  In 
this  respect,  at  least,  the  book  is  unique  among  popular  histories  of  Germany  in  the  English 
language."  —  Review  of  Reviews. 

"  It  has  remained  for  Mr.  Henderson  to  treat  at  all  effectively  in  English  in  a  short  space 
the  development  of  the  German  nation  as  a  progressive  and  ever  mobile  whole.  And  to 
appreciate  the  difficulty  of  the  task  before  him,  we  have  only  to  glance  at  the  powers  and 
forces  that  work  out  their  expression  if  not  their  fulfilment,  on  German  ground  and  through 
German  institutions." —  Commercial  Advertiser,  New  York. 

"  Of  very  decided  importance.  .  .  .  We  have  never  seen  in  English  a  more  satisfactory 
record  of  the  story  of  Germany —  one  that  fulfilled  as  many  requisites  as  does  that  under  review. 
Mr.  Henderson  writes  in  a  straightforward,  unstrained  style  which  makes  his  work  easy  read- 
ing." —  f^nttimore  Sun. 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


THE  AMERICAN  COMMONWEALTH 

By    JAMES    BRYCE 

Author  of  "  The  tloly  Roman  Empire,"  M.P.  tor  Aberdeen 

In  two  volumes.    Third  edition,  completely  revised  throughout, 
with  additional  chapters.    Crown  8vo.    Cloth,  gilt  tops 

Vol.  I.      The  National  Government  —  The  State  Government,    Pp.  xix  +  724. 

Price,  $1.75,  net 

Vol.  II.    The  Party   System  —  Public   Opinion  —  Illustrations  and   Reflections  — 

Social  Institutions.     Pp.  904.  Price,  $2.25,  net 

The  two  volumes  in  a  box,  $4.00,  net 


"It  is  not  too  much  to  call  'The  American  Commonwealth  '  one  of  the  most  distinguished 
additions  to  political  and  social  science  which  this  generation  has  seen.  It  has  done,  and  wiH 
continue  to  do,  a  great  work  in  informing  the  world  concerning  the  principles  of  this  govern- 
ment."—  Philadelphia  Evening  Telegraph. 

"No  enlightened  American  can  desire  a  better  thing  for  his  country  than  the  widest  diffu- 
sion and  the  most  thorough  reading  of  Mr.  Bryce's  impartial  and  penetrating  work."  —  Literary 
World. 


THE  LIFE  OF  NAPOLEON  I. 

INCLUDING  NEW^  MATERIALS  FROM  THE  BRITISH  OFFICIAL  RECORDS 

By    J.    H.    ROSE,    MA. 

Author  of  "  The  Revolutioaary  aad  Napoleonic  Era,  1789— 18 IS,"  etc. 

Illustrated.     In  two  volumes.     Cloth.     8vo.     $4.00,  net 


"  Mr.  Rose  seems  to  have  read  everything  bearing  on  his  subject,  and  to  discriminate  wisely 
as  to  the  value  of  the  authorities.  In  particular  he  has  for  the  first  time  thoroughly  explored 
the  English  Foreign  Office  Records.  The  information  which  he  derives  from  them  serves  in 
general  to  confirm  the  views  held  by  the  majority,  at  least  of  competent  judges.  English  policy 
during  the  great  struggle  which  arose  out  of  the  French  Revolution  was,  as  it  has  usually  been, 
honest  and  sound  in  purpose,  but  too  often  ill  managed  and  weak  in  its  methods.  .  .  .  Mr.  Rose 
excels  in  the  difficult  art  of  stating  complicated  matters  briefly  and  yet  clearly.  .  .  .  Best  of  all, 
perhaps,  is  his  chapter  on  the  schemes  for  colonial  expansion  which  Napoleon  set  on  foot  as 
soon  as  France  was  at  peace;  it  is  admirably  clear,  and  contains  much  that  will  be  new  to  most 
readers.  Mr.  Rose  is  equally  successful  in  his  military  narrative,  a  subject  which  is  especially 
difficult  to  treat  both  briefly  and  lucidly.  He  always  sees  the  essential  points  and  never  includes 
needless  details,  though  here  and  there  an  additional  fact  would  have  made  the  whole  more 
easy  of  comprehension.  .  .  .  We  do  not  know  where  else  to  find  a  series  of  great  military 
operations  described  so  well  and  also  so  concisely.  .  .  .  Nothing  could  be  better  than  the  pages 
in  which  he  describes  and  comments  on  the  death  of  Pitt."  —  The  London  Times. 

"The  author  is  John  Holland  Rose,  the  well-known  English  historian,  and  his  biography 
of  Napoleon  Bonaparte  will  have  little  difficulty  in  taking  rank  as  the  best  in  the  language. 
Napoleon  is,  to  Mr.  Rose,  neither  a  demi-god  nor  an  ogre,  but  a  wonderfully  brilliant  man, 
whose  complete,  but  on  the  whole,  attractive  personality  is  made  the  subject  of  a  penetrating 
and  luminous  psychological  study."  —  The  Philadelphia  Press. 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


i 


Date  Due 

'iOliigBMMMp 

ll*-^-.-'                  ■-|,,-||T| 

' 

JMU 

""^Smm 

iPr^^>-' 

_M«S2_  n    ' ' 

? 

■««8^tai«ii 

.^>  «^  ^  >    •''><M 

.JRMItB^m 

^^^^htim 

B- 

^ 

^58S*sw^ 

...mm^^ 

% 

lA* 

MMilM. 

M^*«?r^ 

p?!»«^'  • 

_-ir?»««^'^ 

NQM-i^ 

^L^JMIM 

1^  ". 

ilaiw*"^ 

,au»w>M4.- 

i 

d 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

%^ 


\v 


?rS?>d9e  modern  history 

Pnnceton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library  _ 


1012  00077  0083 


